BETA


Events

2017/03/29
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2016/10/04
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2016/10/04
   EP - Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 489 votes to 146, with 37 abstentions, a resolution on the future of ACP-EU relations beyond 2020.

Valuable and unique achievement : recalling the strength and acquis of the Cotonou Agreement, Members affirmed that ACP-EU cooperation is a valuable and unique achievement that has strengthened bonds between ACP and EU peoples and countries and their parliaments throughout the last 40 years.

In light of the ACP countries’ demonstration of their commitment to taking joint action as a group, Parliament insisted that in order to improve the effectiveness of cooperation and adapt it to new challenges, a new structure must be adopted that:

maintains those parts of the ACP-EU acquis that are universal in nature, such as a commitment to human rights and gender equality, human development, good governance and democracy, the objective of the rule of law, and exchange of best practice in a common framework; provides that while the main work must be carried out in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity , it must take place in regional agreements that are tailored to specific regional needs and to the mutual interests existing between the EU and the respective region.

Both the common framework and the regional agreements should be legally binding and be designed in a way that takes into account existing regional and sub-regional organisations, e.g. the African Union and the Regional Economic Communities.

Objectives, principles and terms of cooperation : Parliament stated that the following must be placed at the centre of a new agreement:

the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and respect for internationally agreed aid effectiveness principles; fight against, and ultimate eradication of, poverty and inequalities; human rights , democratic principles and the rule of law.

A new agreement must primarily be a political project based on the principle of ownership and clearly leave behind the donor-recipient mentality. Cooperation should take place in areas of common interest where mutual gains can be expected , not just in economic terms but also with regard to peace and security, human rights and the rule of law, good governance and democracy, migration, the environment, climate change.

Members also called for:

an ACP-EU peer monitoring , accountability and review mechanism to scrutinise SDG implementation in Member States on a regular basis; stronger involvement in political dialogue , programming and implementation and support for capacity building by civil society, especially for local groups that are directly concerned by policies; national parliaments and regional and local authorities, both in ACP and EU countries, should participate more at all stages of ACP-EU policies and activities.

The private sector could play a pivotal role in the development process and could contribute to financing development, provided investment occurs with respect for the people, for traditional ownership or use, and for the environment. Private investment should be supported under the auspices of the European Investment Bank (EIB).

Future ACP-EU institutions : Parliament stressed the following points:

joint ACP-EU Council meetings should include topical and urgent political debates, including on sensitive issues, with the aim of adopting joint conclusions on them; the new cooperation agreement should include a strong parliamentary dimension , through a Joint Parliamentary Assembly (JPA), ensuring the adequate democratic and proportional representation and participation of all political forces in its debates; the JPA should be aligned with the new regional structure, thus focusing its work in regional fora on issues of regional importance , strongly involving the national and regional parliaments; further efforts should be made to improve JPA scrutiny of development programming, bearing in mind the development effectiveness principles and follow-up to such scrutiny.

Future funding : Parliament is convinced that the simultaneous expiry of the Cotonou Agreement and of the Union’s multiannual financial framework (MFF) provides an opportunity to finally decide on the budgetisation of the European Development Fund . However, this budgetisation should be conditioned by:

a guaranteed ring-fencing of developing funds to maintain the level of financing for developing countries, and a permanent and separate solution for EU financing of security expenses that are linked to and in coherence with development cooperation.

Members stressed that EU development aid principles must be applied on an equal basis to all developing countries, and that advanced ACP countries must therefore graduate out of receiving EU development aid on the same terms as non-ACP countries.

Furthermore, a higher degree of self-financing by the ACP countries would be in line with the ACP ambitions to be an autonomous player, and the new agreement should include enhanced tools for building ACP countries' capacity to fund vital economic sectors.

Parliament noted the Commission communication of 7 June 2016 on establishing a new partnership framework with third countries under the European Agenda on Migration. It noted that the EU budget and the EDF contribution to the package of EUR 8 billion is exclusively composed of aid which was already planned. It called for development assistance to beneficiaries not to be jeopardised and for migration-related initiatives to be financed with fresh appropriations.

Trade dimension : Members reiterated that Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) constitute a basis for regional cooperation and that they must be instruments for development and regional integration. They called for a post-Cotonou Agreement as a political umbrella agreement under which binding minimum requirements for EPAs are set , in order to ensure continuity for EPA linkages in the existing Cotonou Agreement to sustainability provisions on good governance, respect for human rights, including among the most vulnerable people, and respect for social and environmental standards.

Lastly, Parliament called for a joint parliamentary scrutiny and monitoring process on the impact of the EPA as well as structured civil society monitoring mechanisms.

Documents
2016/10/04
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2016/10/03
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2016/09/12
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Details

The Committee on Development adopted the own-initiative report by Norbert NEUSER (S&D, DE) on the future of ACP-EU relations beyond 2020.

Members recalled that 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 June 2000 (the Cotonou Agreement), is based on a number of unique characteristics: it is: (i) a legally binding document, with an unparalleled numerical strength of 79+28 member states, (ii) comprehensive through its three pillars of development cooperation, political cooperation and economic and trade cooperation, and (iii) comprised of a joint institutional framework, with a large budget in the form of the European Development Fund (EDF).

The report recalled the unique nature of ACP-EU cooperation and stressed the need to put in place a new structure that maintains those parts of the ACP-EU acquis, e.g.:

a commitment to human rights and gender equality, human development, good governance and democracy; the objective of the rule of law; exchange of best practice in a common framework, while the main work must be carried out in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, that is, it must take place in regional agreements that are tailored to specific regional needs and to the mutual interests existing between the EU and the region.

Members underlined that the common framework and the regional agreements should be legally binding.

Objectives, principles and terms of cooperation : the report states that the following must be placed at the centre of a new agreement:

the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and respect for internationally agreed aid effectiveness principles; fight against, and ultimate eradication of, poverty and inequalities; human rights , democratic principles and the rule of law.

Members called for an ACP-EU peer monitoring , accountability and review mechanism to scrutinise SDG implementation in member states on a regular basis. They also called for stronger involvement in political dialogue , programming and implementation and support for capacity building by civil society, especially for local groups that are directly concerned by policies.

The private sector could play a pivotal role in the development process and could contribute to financing development, provided investment occurs with respect for the people, for traditional ownership or use, and for the environment. Private investment should be supported under the auspices of the European Investment Bank (EIB).

Future ACP-EU institutions : the report stressed the following points:

joint ACP-EU Council meetings should include topical and urgent political debates, including on sensitive issues, with the aim of adopting joint conclusions on them; the new cooperation agreement should include a strong parliamentary dimension , through a Joint Parliamentary Assembly (JPA), ensuring the adequate democratic and proportional representation and participation of all political forces in its debates; the JPA should be aligned with the new regional structure, thus focusing its work in regional fora on issues of regional importance , strongly involving the national and regional parliaments; further efforts should be made to improve JPA scrutiny of development programming, bearing in mind the development effectiveness principles and follow-up to such scrutiny.

Future funding : Members were convinced that the simultaneous expiry of the Cotonou Agreement and of the Union’s multiannual financial framework (MFF) provides an opportunity to finally decide on the budgetisation of the European Development Fund . However, this budgetisation should be conditioned by:

a guaranteed ring-fencing of developing funds to maintain the level of financing for developing countries, and a permanent and separate solution for EU financing of security expenses that are linked to and in coherence with development cooperation;

Members stressed that EU development aid principles must be applied on an equal basis to all developing countries, and that advanced ACP countries must therefore graduate out of receiving EU development aid on the same terms as non-ACP countries. Furthermore, a higher degree of self-financing by the ACP countries would be in line with the ACP ambitions to be an autonomous player, and the new agreement should include enhanced tools for building ACP countries' capacity to fund vital economic sectors.

The report called for the introduction of a dedicated instrument for all overseas countries and territories (OCTs), which is in keeping with their special status and their membership of the European family.

Trade dimension : Members reiterated that Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) constitute a basis for regional cooperation and that they must be instruments for development and regional integration. They called for a post-Cotonou Agreement as a political umbrella agreement under which binding minimum requirements for EPAs are set , in order to ensure continuity for EPA linkages in the existing Cotonou Agreement to sustainability provisions on good governance, respect for human rights, including among the most vulnerable people, and respect for social and environmental standards.

Documents
2016/08/31
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/08/31
   EP - Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
2016/07/20
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/07/13
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2016/06/28
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2016/06/01
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2016/05/18
   EP - COUSO PERMUY Javier (GUE/NGL) appointed as rapporteur in AFET
2016/04/28
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2016/04/20
   EP - SILVA PEREIRA Pedro (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in INTA
2016/04/08
   EP - NEUSER Norbert (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in DEVE
2016/03/16
   EP - GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in BUDG

Documents

Activities

Votes

A8-0263/2016 - Norbert Neuser - Résolution

2016/10/04 Outcome: +: 489, -: 146, 0: 37
IT DE RO PL ES FR CZ HU BG BE PT SK NL FI AT DK LT SE HR SI MT LV EE LU GB IE CY EL
Total
68
91
26
49
45
71
19
17
13
20
21
12
24
12
17
11
9
18
8
8
6
6
6
4
53
10
6
21
icon: PPE PPE
194

Finland PPE

2

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Lithuania PPE

1
2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

2

Cyprus PPE

1
icon: S&D S&D
176

Netherlands S&D

3

Croatia S&D

For (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

3

Latvia S&D

1

Estonia S&D

For (1)

1

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2
icon: ALDE ALDE
64

Romania ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

2

Croatia ALDE

2

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
53

Italy ECR

2

Romania ECR

For (1)

1

Czechia ECR

1

Bulgaria ECR

1

Slovakia ECR

Abstain (1)

3

Netherlands ECR

2
2

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Cyprus ECR

1

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: NI NI
14

Germany NI

2

Poland NI

Against (1)

1

France NI

Against (1)

2
3

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
41

Germany EFDD

Against (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1

France EFDD

Against (1)

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2
icon: ENF ENF
34

Germany ENF

Against (1)

1

Poland ENF

Against (1)

1

Belgium ENF

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

3
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
46

France Verts/ALE

6

Hungary Verts/ALE

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

Against (1)

2

Netherlands Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

Against (2)

2

Denmark Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

For (1)

4

Croatia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Abstain (1)

1

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

5
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
49

Italy GUE/NGL

3

Czechia GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

3

Finland GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
4

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2
AmendmentsDossier
403 2016/2053(INI)
2016/06/16 AFET 102 amendments...
source: 584.245
2016/06/22 INTA 87 amendments...
source: 585.427
2016/06/28 DEVE 214 amendments...
source: 585.511

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
rapporteur
name: NEUSER Norbert date: 2016-04-08T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
shadows
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
date
2016-04-08T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: NEUSER Norbert group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
shadows
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
committee
AFET
rapporteur
name: COUSO PERMUY Javier date: 2016-05-18T00:00:00 group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
committee
AFET
date
2016-05-18T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: COUSO PERMUY Javier group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
International Trade
committee
INTA
rapporteur
name: SILVA PEREIRA Pedro date: 2016-04-20T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
International Trade
committee
INTA
date
2016-04-20T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: SILVA PEREIRA Pedro group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
rapporteur
name: GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider date: 2016-03-16T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
date
2016-03-16T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
docs/5/body
EC
events/2/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0263&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2016-0263_EN.html
events/5/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0371
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2016-0371_EN.html
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
date
2016-04-08T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: NEUSER Norbert group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
shadows
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
date
2016-04-08T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: NEUSER Norbert group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
shadows
activities
  • date: 2016-04-28T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: AFET date: 2016-05-18T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: COUSO PERMUY Javier body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2016-03-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: S&D name: GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: PONGA Maurice group: ECR name: DEVA Nirj group: ALDE name: MICHEL Louis group: GUE/NGL name: SÁNCHEZ CALDENTEY Lola group: Verts/ALE name: HEUBUCH Maria group: EFD name: CORRAO Ignazio responsible: True committee: DEVE date: 2016-04-08T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: S&D name: NEUSER Norbert body: EP responsible: False committee: INTA date: 2016-04-20T00:00:00 committee_full: International Trade rapporteur: group: S&D name: SILVA PEREIRA Pedro
  • date: 2016-08-31T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: AFET date: 2016-05-18T00:00:00 committee_full: Foreign Affairs rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: COUSO PERMUY Javier body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2016-03-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: S&D name: GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: PONGA Maurice group: ECR name: DEVA Nirj group: ALDE name: MICHEL Louis group: GUE/NGL name: SÁNCHEZ CALDENTEY Lola group: Verts/ALE name: HEUBUCH Maria group: EFD name: CORRAO Ignazio responsible: True committee: DEVE date: 2016-04-08T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: S&D name: NEUSER Norbert body: EP responsible: False committee: INTA date: 2016-04-20T00:00:00 committee_full: International Trade rapporteur: group: S&D name: SILVA PEREIRA Pedro
  • date: 2016-09-12T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0263&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A8-0263/2016 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2016-10-03T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20161003&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2016-10-04T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0371 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T8-0371/2016 body: EP type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Development
committee
DEVE
date
2016-04-08T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: NEUSER Norbert group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
shadows
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
AFET
date
2016-05-18T00:00:00
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
rapporteur
group: GUE/NGL name: COUSO PERMUY Javier
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Foreign Affairs
committee
AFET
date
2016-05-18T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: COUSO PERMUY Javier group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/1
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
BUDG
date
2016-03-16T00:00:00
committee_full
Budgets
rapporteur
group: S&D name: GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
International Trade
committee
INTA
date
2016-04-20T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: SILVA PEREIRA Pedro group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/2
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
DEVE
date
2016-04-08T00:00:00
committee_full
Development
rapporteur
group: S&D name: NEUSER Norbert
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
date
2016-03-16T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/3
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
INTA
date
2016-04-20T00:00:00
committee_full
International Trade
rapporteur
group: S&D name: SILVA PEREIRA Pedro
docs
  • date: 2016-06-01T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE582.322 title: PE582.322 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2016-06-28T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE585.511 title: PE585.511 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2016-07-13T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE584.018&secondRef=02 title: PE584.018 committee: BUDG type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2016-07-20T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE583.902&secondRef=02 title: PE583.902 committee: INTA type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2016-08-31T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE582.441&secondRef=03 title: PE582.441 committee: AFET type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2017-03-29T00:00:00 docs: url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=27550&j=0&l=en title: SP(2017)67 type: Commission response to text adopted in plenary
events
  • date: 2016-04-28T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2016-08-31T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2016-09-12T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0263&language=EN title: A8-0263/2016 summary: The Committee on Development adopted the own-initiative report by Norbert NEUSER (S&D, DE) on the future of ACP-EU relations beyond 2020. Members recalled that 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 June 2000 (the Cotonou Agreement), is based on a number of unique characteristics: it is: (i) a legally binding document, with an unparalleled numerical strength of 79+28 member states, (ii) comprehensive through its three pillars of development cooperation, political cooperation and economic and trade cooperation, and (iii) comprised of a joint institutional framework, with a large budget in the form of the European Development Fund (EDF). The report recalled the unique nature of ACP-EU cooperation and stressed the need to put in place a new structure that maintains those parts of the ACP-EU acquis, e.g.: a commitment to human rights and gender equality, human development, good governance and democracy; the objective of the rule of law; exchange of best practice in a common framework, while the main work must be carried out in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, that is, it must take place in regional agreements that are tailored to specific regional needs and to the mutual interests existing between the EU and the region. Members underlined that the common framework and the regional agreements should be legally binding. Objectives, principles and terms of cooperation : the report states that the following must be placed at the centre of a new agreement: the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and respect for internationally agreed aid effectiveness principles; fight against, and ultimate eradication of, poverty and inequalities; human rights , democratic principles and the rule of law. Members called for an ACP-EU peer monitoring , accountability and review mechanism to scrutinise SDG implementation in member states on a regular basis. They also called for stronger involvement in political dialogue , programming and implementation and support for capacity building by civil society, especially for local groups that are directly concerned by policies. The private sector could play a pivotal role in the development process and could contribute to financing development, provided investment occurs with respect for the people, for traditional ownership or use, and for the environment. Private investment should be supported under the auspices of the European Investment Bank (EIB). Future ACP-EU institutions : the report stressed the following points: joint ACP-EU Council meetings should include topical and urgent political debates, including on sensitive issues, with the aim of adopting joint conclusions on them; the new cooperation agreement should include a strong parliamentary dimension , through a Joint Parliamentary Assembly (JPA), ensuring the adequate democratic and proportional representation and participation of all political forces in its debates; the JPA should be aligned with the new regional structure, thus focusing its work in regional fora on issues of regional importance , strongly involving the national and regional parliaments; further efforts should be made to improve JPA scrutiny of development programming, bearing in mind the development effectiveness principles and follow-up to such scrutiny. Future funding : Members were convinced that the simultaneous expiry of the Cotonou Agreement and of the Union’s multiannual financial framework (MFF) provides an opportunity to finally decide on the budgetisation of the European Development Fund . However, this budgetisation should be conditioned by: a guaranteed ring-fencing of developing funds to maintain the level of financing for developing countries, and a permanent and separate solution for EU financing of security expenses that are linked to and in coherence with development cooperation; Members stressed that EU development aid principles must be applied on an equal basis to all developing countries, and that advanced ACP countries must therefore graduate out of receiving EU development aid on the same terms as non-ACP countries. Furthermore, a higher degree of self-financing by the ACP countries would be in line with the ACP ambitions to be an autonomous player, and the new agreement should include enhanced tools for building ACP countries' capacity to fund vital economic sectors. The report called for the introduction of a dedicated instrument for all overseas countries and territories (OCTs), which is in keeping with their special status and their membership of the European family. Trade dimension : Members reiterated that Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) constitute a basis for regional cooperation and that they must be instruments for development and regional integration. They called for a post-Cotonou Agreement as a political umbrella agreement under which binding minimum requirements for EPAs are set , in order to ensure continuity for EPA linkages in the existing Cotonou Agreement to sustainability provisions on good governance, respect for human rights, including among the most vulnerable people, and respect for social and environmental standards.
  • date: 2016-10-03T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20161003&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2016-10-04T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=27550&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2016-10-04T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0371 title: T8-0371/2016 summary: The European Parliament adopted by 489 votes to 146, with 37 abstentions, a resolution on the future of ACP-EU relations beyond 2020. Valuable and unique achievement : recalling the strength and acquis of the Cotonou Agreement, Members affirmed that ACP-EU cooperation is a valuable and unique achievement that has strengthened bonds between ACP and EU peoples and countries and their parliaments throughout the last 40 years. In light of the ACP countries’ demonstration of their commitment to taking joint action as a group, Parliament insisted that in order to improve the effectiveness of cooperation and adapt it to new challenges, a new structure must be adopted that: maintains those parts of the ACP-EU acquis that are universal in nature, such as a commitment to human rights and gender equality, human development, good governance and democracy, the objective of the rule of law, and exchange of best practice in a common framework; provides that while the main work must be carried out in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity , it must take place in regional agreements that are tailored to specific regional needs and to the mutual interests existing between the EU and the respective region. Both the common framework and the regional agreements should be legally binding and be designed in a way that takes into account existing regional and sub-regional organisations, e.g. the African Union and the Regional Economic Communities. Objectives, principles and terms of cooperation : Parliament stated that the following must be placed at the centre of a new agreement: the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and respect for internationally agreed aid effectiveness principles; fight against, and ultimate eradication of, poverty and inequalities; human rights , democratic principles and the rule of law. A new agreement must primarily be a political project based on the principle of ownership and clearly leave behind the donor-recipient mentality. Cooperation should take place in areas of common interest where mutual gains can be expected , not just in economic terms but also with regard to peace and security, human rights and the rule of law, good governance and democracy, migration, the environment, climate change. Members also called for: an ACP-EU peer monitoring , accountability and review mechanism to scrutinise SDG implementation in Member States on a regular basis; stronger involvement in political dialogue , programming and implementation and support for capacity building by civil society, especially for local groups that are directly concerned by policies; national parliaments and regional and local authorities, both in ACP and EU countries, should participate more at all stages of ACP-EU policies and activities. The private sector could play a pivotal role in the development process and could contribute to financing development, provided investment occurs with respect for the people, for traditional ownership or use, and for the environment. Private investment should be supported under the auspices of the European Investment Bank (EIB). Future ACP-EU institutions : Parliament stressed the following points: joint ACP-EU Council meetings should include topical and urgent political debates, including on sensitive issues, with the aim of adopting joint conclusions on them; the new cooperation agreement should include a strong parliamentary dimension , through a Joint Parliamentary Assembly (JPA), ensuring the adequate democratic and proportional representation and participation of all political forces in its debates; the JPA should be aligned with the new regional structure, thus focusing its work in regional fora on issues of regional importance , strongly involving the national and regional parliaments; further efforts should be made to improve JPA scrutiny of development programming, bearing in mind the development effectiveness principles and follow-up to such scrutiny. Future funding : Parliament is convinced that the simultaneous expiry of the Cotonou Agreement and of the Union’s multiannual financial framework (MFF) provides an opportunity to finally decide on the budgetisation of the European Development Fund . However, this budgetisation should be conditioned by: a guaranteed ring-fencing of developing funds to maintain the level of financing for developing countries, and a permanent and separate solution for EU financing of security expenses that are linked to and in coherence with development cooperation. Members stressed that EU development aid principles must be applied on an equal basis to all developing countries, and that advanced ACP countries must therefore graduate out of receiving EU development aid on the same terms as non-ACP countries. Furthermore, a higher degree of self-financing by the ACP countries would be in line with the ACP ambitions to be an autonomous player, and the new agreement should include enhanced tools for building ACP countries' capacity to fund vital economic sectors. Parliament noted the Commission communication of 7 June 2016 on establishing a new partnership framework with third countries under the European Agenda on Migration. It noted that the EU budget and the EDF contribution to the package of EUR 8 billion is exclusively composed of aid which was already planned. It called for development assistance to beneficiaries not to be jeopardised and for migration-related initiatives to be financed with fresh appropriations. Trade dimension : Members reiterated that Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) constitute a basis for regional cooperation and that they must be instruments for development and regional integration. They called for a post-Cotonou Agreement as a political umbrella agreement under which binding minimum requirements for EPAs are set , in order to ensure continuity for EPA linkages in the existing Cotonou Agreement to sustainability provisions on good governance, respect for human rights, including among the most vulnerable people, and respect for social and environmental standards. Lastly, Parliament called for a joint parliamentary scrutiny and monitoring process on the impact of the EPA as well as structured civil society monitoring mechanisms.
  • date: 2016-10-04T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
links
other
    procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
    Old
    DEVE/8/06161
    New
    • DEVE/8/06161
    procedure/legal_basis/0
    Rules of Procedure EP 54
    procedure/legal_basis/0
    Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
    procedure/subject
    Old
    • 6.40.06 Relations with ACP countries, conventions and generalities
    New
    6.40.06
    Relations with ACP countries, conventions and generalities
    activities/4/docs
    • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2016-0371 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T8-0371/2016
    activities/4/type
    Old
    Vote in plenary scheduled
    New
    Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
    procedure/stage_reached
    Old
    Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
    New
    Procedure completed
    activities/3
    date
    2016-10-03T00:00:00
    docs
    url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20161003&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament
    body
    EP
    type
    Debate in Parliament
    activities/3
    date
    2016-10-03T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Debate in plenary scheduled
    activities/2/docs/0/text
    • The Committee on Development adopted the own-initiative report by Norbert NEUSER (S&D, DE) on the future of ACP-EU relations beyond 2020.

      Members recalled that 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 June 2000 (the Cotonou Agreement), is based on a number of unique characteristics: it is: (i) a legally binding document, with an unparalleled numerical strength of 79+28 member states, (ii) comprehensive through its three pillars of development cooperation, political cooperation and economic and trade cooperation, and (iii) comprised of a joint institutional framework, with a large budget in the form of the European Development Fund (EDF).

      The report recalled the unique nature of ACP-EU cooperation and stressed the need to put in place a new structure that maintains those parts of the ACP-EU acquis, e.g.:

      • a commitment to human rights and gender equality, human development, good governance and democracy;
      • the objective of the rule of law;
      • exchange of best practice in a common framework, while the main work must be carried out in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, that is, it must take place in regional agreements that are tailored to specific regional needs and to the mutual interests existing between the EU and the region.

      Members underlined that the common framework and the regional agreements should be legally binding.

      Objectives, principles and terms of cooperation: the report states that the following must be placed at the centre of a new agreement:

      • the 2030 Agenda and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and respect for internationally agreed aid effectiveness principles;
      • fight against, and ultimate eradication of, poverty and inequalities;
      • human rights, democratic principles and the rule of law.

      Members called for an ACP-EU peer monitoring, accountability and review mechanism to scrutinise SDG implementation in member states on a regular basis. They also called for stronger involvement in political dialogue, programming and implementation and support for capacity building by civil society, especially for local groups that are directly concerned by policies.

      The private sector could play a pivotal role in the development process and could contribute to financing development, provided investment occurs with respect for the people, for traditional ownership or use, and for the environment. Private investment should be supported under the auspices of the European Investment Bank (EIB).

      Future ACP-EU institutions: the report stressed the following points:

      • joint ACP-EU Council meetings should include topical and urgent political debates, including on sensitive issues, with the aim of adopting joint conclusions on them;
      • the new cooperation agreement should include a strong parliamentary dimension, through a Joint Parliamentary Assembly (JPA), ensuring the adequate democratic and proportional representation and participation of all political forces in its debates;
      • the JPA should be aligned with the new regional structure, thus focusing its work in regional fora on issues of regional importance, strongly involving the national and regional parliaments;
      • further efforts should be made to improve JPA scrutiny of development programming, bearing in mind the development effectiveness principles and follow-up to such scrutiny.

      Future funding: Members were convinced that the simultaneous expiry of the Cotonou Agreement and of the Union’s multiannual financial framework (MFF) provides an opportunity to finally decide on the budgetisation of the European Development Fund. However, this budgetisation should be conditioned by:

      • a guaranteed ring-fencing of developing funds to maintain the level of financing for developing countries, and
      • a permanent and separate solution for EU financing of security expenses that are linked to and in coherence with development cooperation;

      Members stressed that EU development aid principles must be applied on an equal basis to all developing countries, and that advanced ACP countries must therefore graduate out of receiving EU development aid on the same terms as non-ACP countries. Furthermore, a higher degree of self-financing by the ACP countries would be in line with the ACP ambitions to be an autonomous player, and the new agreement should include enhanced tools for building ACP countries' capacity to fund vital economic sectors.

      The report called for the introduction of a dedicated instrument for all overseas countries and territories (OCTs), which is in keeping with their special status and their membership of the European family.

      Trade dimension: Members reiterated that Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) constitute a basis for regional cooperation and that they must be instruments for development and regional integration. They called for a post-Cotonou Agreement as a political umbrella agreement under which binding minimum requirements for EPAs are set, in order to ensure continuity for EPA linkages in the existing Cotonou Agreement to sustainability provisions on good governance, respect for human rights, including among the most vulnerable people, and respect for social and environmental standards.

    activities/2/docs
    • url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2016-0263&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A8-0263/2016
    activities/3/type
    Old
    Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
    New
    Debate in plenary scheduled
    activities/4
    date
    2016-10-04T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Vote in plenary scheduled
    activities/2
    date
    2016-09-12T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
    procedure/stage_reached
    Old
    Awaiting committee decision
    New
    Awaiting Parliament 1st reading / single reading / budget 1st stage
    activities/1
    date
    2016-08-31T00:00:00
    body
    EP
    type
    Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
    committees
    activities/0/committees/0/date
    2016-05-18T00:00:00
    activities/0/committees/0/rapporteur
    • group: GUE/NGL name: COUSO PERMUY Javier
    committees/0/date
    2016-05-18T00:00:00
    committees/0/rapporteur
    • group: GUE/NGL name: COUSO PERMUY Javier
    activities
    • date: 2016-04-28T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Foreign Affairs committee: AFET body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2016-03-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: S&D name: GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: PONGA Maurice group: ECR name: DEVA Nirj group: ALDE name: MICHEL Louis group: GUE/NGL name: SÁNCHEZ CALDENTEY Lola group: Verts/ALE name: HEUBUCH Maria group: EFD name: CORRAO Ignazio responsible: True committee: DEVE date: 2016-04-08T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: S&D name: NEUSER Norbert body: EP responsible: False committee: INTA date: 2016-04-20T00:00:00 committee_full: International Trade rapporteur: group: S&D name: SILVA PEREIRA Pedro
    • date: 2016-10-03T00:00:00 body: EP type: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
    committees
    • body: EP responsible: False committee_full: Foreign Affairs committee: AFET
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2016-03-16T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: S&D name: GARDIAZABAL RUBIAL Eider
    • body: EP shadows: group: EPP name: PONGA Maurice group: ECR name: DEVA Nirj group: ALDE name: MICHEL Louis group: GUE/NGL name: SÁNCHEZ CALDENTEY Lola group: Verts/ALE name: HEUBUCH Maria group: EFD name: CORRAO Ignazio responsible: True committee: DEVE date: 2016-04-08T00:00:00 committee_full: Development rapporteur: group: S&D name: NEUSER Norbert
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: INTA date: 2016-04-20T00:00:00 committee_full: International Trade rapporteur: group: S&D name: SILVA PEREIRA Pedro
    links
    other
      procedure
      dossier_of_the_committee
      DEVE/8/06161
      reference
      2016/2053(INI)
      title
      Future of ACP-EU relations beyond 2020
      legal_basis
      Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
      stage_reached
      Awaiting committee decision
      subtype
      Initiative
      type
      INI - Own-initiative procedure
      subject
      6.40.06 Relations with ACP countries, conventions and generalities