Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-01-12-Speech-3-055"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050112.4.3-055"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"The scale of the disaster and the shocking images plastered on our televisions and newspapers sparked massive sympathy among our European citizens, who widely demanded a very quick and large-scale response. We should be proud of the European response. Europeans have provided a massive demonstration of solidarity, at the level of institutions and at the level of individual citizens. Overall European support for the victims and countries affected is by far the most important worldwide: Europe was the first donor to announce direct assistance; European representatives were among the first on the ground. I want to praise all of those directly and indirectly involved in this enormous effort.
On the reconstruction side, I proposed that EUR 350 million be made available. I envisage that part of this will come from fresh funds and part from a reprogramming of funds already planned for the affected countries. Although the reconstruction task will take several years, the financing of this reconstruction effort should be provided this year and next year. I understand that the word 'reprogramming' has caused some concern in Parliament. So why is the Commission proposing this? The main reason is speed. The funds for projects planned for 2005 are already on the table and can be used for the urgent and immediate reconstruction work. Waiting for fresh funds to come on stream will take up to six months. We need to move with reconstruction funds now. All donors are responding in the same way, including the World Bank, to mobilise funds for the tsunami relief project as fast as possible. Moreover, I do not believe this approach will have any negative side effects.
We may ask whether this will lead to a cancellation of projects already planned. The answer is no. If, like us, the governments decide that the tsunami-related project takes immediate priority, the originally-planned projects can be taken up in 2006 or 2007 under the new financial perspective; in some cases, the problem is that we cannot go on with the previous project for those regions because the tsunami has affected those regions, so we have to give priority to the tsunami-related projects.
Will this lead to Asia robbing other regions of their funds? The answer is no. Any projects that may be reprioritised and delayed in this way will be within the Asia envelope which, if necessary, will have to be readapted. I count on your support in this regard. Having seen the European Parliament's draft resolution, I can assure you that the 'poor across the world will not pay the price of this disaster'.
Regarding cooperation development aid, the priority of the European Union clearly is, and will continue to be, Africa, on account of its structural needs, of which you are all aware. But this does not mean that we cannot proceed now by giving direct priority to the relief for this disaster.
Let me give you some specific examples of how this reprogramming approach can be of immediate value. In Indonesia, the Commission has a EUR 35 million programme which aims to improve access and quality of healthcare at community level. If the government of Indonesia agrees, this can be extended quickly to help rebuild and strengthen healthcare facilities damaged by the tsunami. In Sri Lanka we are planning to cooperate with the World Bank on a housing programme to assist the resettlement of internally-displaced persons. Similarly, this programme could be broadened quickly to assist with the rehousing of families displaced by the tsunami.
Whatever the level of new funding, I stress that the Commission needs to look at how planned projects can be reprogrammed in this way to ensure that we can respond to reconstruction within the critical first months. But the Commission's pledge was provisional and could be revisited once final costings have been made. We already know that needs are huge and there could be room for an even higher contribution of fresh funds if both Parliament and the Council agree to it.
I fully support the line agreed in Jakarta that the countries must conduct assessments of need and create their own national tsunami reconstruction plans. That would identify the priority projects and the means to implement them. It is a matter of basic principle: allowing the countries to assume their own responsibility and ensuring that they coordinate all the generous commitments made. We should not flood the countries with hundreds of different facilities and instruments drawn up beforehand with donors or international financial institutions.
Let us look at another principle that all donors and countries agreed in Jakarta: to deliver our support rapidly. I emphasised in Jakarta that the Commission would seek to explore all means at its disposal to turn its plans into effective programmes as quickly as possible. The General Affairs Council further lent its support to this commitment. This means accelerating our procedures as much as possible within the confines of the Financial Regulation so that unnecessarily heavy bureaucracy does not slow us down.
I saw how rapidly and efficiently the countries have already moved in helping their citizens. It is impressive! As such, we should provide the bulk of our aid as budget support, giving the countries the tools to rebuild their destroyed infrastructure and to restore the livelihoods of their shattered communities. This approach is the only way in which the affected countries can coordinate the aid efficiently. It would be an impossible task for them if the hundreds of donors gave their aid separately and all demanded that their own procedures be followed.
However, budget support must be properly supervised if we are to have the comfort of sound financial management of our funds. To this end, I support the initiative of the World Bank and the other international financial institutions to develop trust funds with the countries concerned, effectively creating a common pot into which donors can put funds along with a common set of rules for implementing, monitoring and auditing, which will guide the management of the funds.
As regards the management of the crisis, I want to highlight the excellent cooperation between the Commission and the Council presidency, in particular the cooperation of Prime Minister Juncker, and the European Parliament. We have shown how crucial it is to ensure sound and effective interinstitutional cooperation.
The Commission will also need to address punctual and particular projects that will be better delivered by direct implementation rather than by passing through the national budgets. For example, some specific work may be started in the humanitarian phase that could usefully be continued under the initial reconstruction phase. Alternatively, there may be specific conditions that prevent easy access for the national budget to certain geographical regions or, indeed, to the poorest communities who must benefit from this reconstruction. Such cases would also warrant the continued channelling of part of our funds through NGOs.
The European Commission has been active from day one on all fronts, from humanitarian aid to civil protection and, increasingly so, to rehabilitation and reconstruction. We will pursue our efforts relentlessly. However, we will also reflect on improvements, new ideas and solutions. We will reply to the Council's requests for proposals and put forward innovative tools. In doing so, our main concern will be to find solutions that provide effectiveness and good use of available capacities in the Member States and European institutions, optimising means and technologies at European level. Creating new structures for the sake of it is not an option; making better use of the vast existing European capacity in a coordinated and articulated manner is the way forward.
We will also be particularly attentive to the European dimension of our initiatives and will be keen to make it more visible to the general public and to the beneficiaries. Solidarity is a trademark of the European Union. Let it be experienced also in times of crisis.
I recognise the importance Parliament places on additional measures beyond aid that the European Union can provide further to help the countries affected by the tsunami. You can rest assured that all Commission departments are mobilised in their particular areas to investigate what can be done in this regard. This includes support for the G8 debt moratorium initiatives, the investigation of possible trade initiatives to ease trade access to the Union for the countries concerned and working with the governments to seek to facilitate the implementation of the European Investment Bank's Indian Ocean Tsunami Facility.
The Member States and Commission agreed in the General Affairs Council to offer direct support to the countries in their efforts to develop early-warning systems so they will be better able to respond to future disasters.
I noted with interest the ideas being floated on the possibility of supplying fishing vessels from the Commission, that is to say, European Union fleets to the fishing communities in the affected countries. The idea is very appealing. We have all seen pictures of boats wrecked by the tsunami, and our own fishing industry is about to destroy boats from its own fleet in line with fishery limits.
My services are currently exploring whether vessels are available, what state of repair they are in, if they meet the need of the fishing communities in the tsunami-affected areas, and how they could be made available to these fishermen. I hope that this initiative will work and we will report back to you with the results of our work.
The Commission is also considering proposals for a new European Union approach to reinforce capacity for disaster prevention and, as discussed in the extraordinary Council meeting last Friday, we intend to look at early-warning mechanisms and preparation for disaster management, the ways to further improve the Commission's humanitarian aid provision, and civil protection, with a view to developing our rapid response to crises in third countries in full respect of the specificity and principles of humanitarian aid. In this context, the Commission is preparing a proposal for the development of a rapid response capacity of the European Union, which will permit it to enhance its assistance in future humanitarian disasters and other crises. We expect to present that proposal at the Council meeting on 31 January 2005.
In every successful emergency programme organised by the Commission, Parliament has played a pivotal role. In this regard, I think of Afghanistan or the Balkans. This role is not simply to agree on funding, but to follow the programme and to lend political weight where needed to ensure that the programme's political goals remain on track. Your attention could also focus on the administrative resources – in headquarters and in delegations – necessary for effective delivery. I am confident that you will play an important role in facilitating the Commission's programme of reconstruction after the tsunami. To this end, I will undertake that the Commission will report to you regularly on progress, both in plenary and in committees.
In other emergency situations the Commission has had more time to discuss and prepare its response beforehand with Parliament and the Council, our budgetary authorities. In this case, we did not have that time. Within nine days of the waves striking the coastlines of Asia and Africa, the heads of government from the affected countries and the major donors were gathering in Jakarta to agree on how we would repair the damage and what funds we would make available.
The College had an extensive discussion yesterday on the Asian crisis and on how we should organise our follow-up to the work done so far. By the end of this month, I expect to present Commission proposals for an improved European crisis response capability. Commissioner Ferrero-Waldner will go to the region in the coming weeks to further assess needs and to put more flesh on this proposal. I will propose that she report to Parliament on her return.
We have set high targets for the European Union's response to the South Asian crisis, both in Jakarta and in United Nations meetings in Geneva. The outpouring of support from our private citizens for this crisis further shows their support for the full commitment of all European Union institutions to deliver on the promises we have made. We must provide answers and I count on your support in helping the Commission to deliver. I give you my promise to work closely with you in the massive task ahead of us.
To prepare the ground within the limited time that we had, I discussed with President Borrell Fontelles and Prime Minister Juncker, before leaving for Jakarta, the Commission's proposal to pledge up to EUR 450 million. They were both very positive and supportive of the approach I proposed. Indeed, at the conference in Jakarta I mentioned a special message that President Borrell Fontelles sent me and asked me to transmit to the heads of state and government gathered there.
Without having had an opportunity for detailed discussion in Parliament's plenary and the Council, I indicated to the pledging conference in Jakarta that the Commission's EUR 450 million pledge was conditional on its approval by the budgetary authorities and that includes you, the European Parliament. The Commission's priority today is to listen to your views, answer your questions and agree on how we can best tackle the two main tasks we now face, namely how to turn our conditional pledge rapidly into concrete money on the budget, and then to turn those funds into effective reconstruction programmes on the ground that will help people rebuild their shattered lives.
While it is still early days, I should like to explain in more detail what I have in mind as to how best to use the Commission's pledge, if you and the Council agree to the funding that we have proposed.
On the humanitarian side, the Commission has responded rapidly and very efficiently. Through our humanitarian assistance office, ECHO, we were one of the first organisations to respond to the disaster by making – EUR 23 million available – EUR 3 million of which were available on the day of the disaster itself – in humanitarian aid to the Red Cross and other partners for meeting essential needs. We reinforced ECHO staff on the ground, and our experts have been working closely with the United Nations and other donors to assess needs and ensure the coordination of the humanitarian aid effort on the ground.
Commissioner Michel travelled to the most affected areas from 1 to 7 January to gather a first-hand impression and gauge needs for relief and rehabilitation. We have also been quick in mobilising civil protection. The European Civil Protection Mechanism, under the responsibility of Commissioner Dimas, has been active since the very first reports of the tsunami.
Throughout the disaster, the European Commission's Monitoring and Information Centre has operated around the clock to mobilise and coordinate civil protection assistance from European Union Member States and neighbouring countries. The mechanism has proved to be a simple and efficient system that allows the targeting of assistance to the specific needs of each affected country. Within 24 hours of the disaster, the Centre sent assessment and coordination experts to Thailand and Sri Lanka. As Mr Kofi Annan has underlined, USD 1 billion will be needed immediately. In answer to this, I proposed, as part of the pledge, that another EUR 100 million be allocated from the emergency reserve to provide humanitarian assistance. I understand your committees have been discussing this proposal favourably and Commissioner Michel indicated our commitment at the United Nation's pledging conference held in Geneva yesterday. This also shows our full support for Parliament's approach of underlining the coordination role of the United Nations."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples