§ Mr. BercowTo ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the objectives were of the(a) environment and tropical forests and (b) training and public awareness projects financed by the General Commission Budget in 2002; what his Department's involvement in the projects was; what the outcome was; and what assessment he has made of their value for money. [160704]
Mr. Gareth ThomasThe objectives of the Environment and tropical forests projects were to support the conservation and stainable management of forests. DFID was consulted during the drafting of strategic guidelines and priorities for funding for the Environment and Forestry Budget Line. The Department also participated in committee meetings that reviewed proposals.
The training and public awareness projects aim to provide support for public awareness projects that increase European awareness of international development. There is an EC NGO co-financing management committee, which in 2002 consisted of delegates drawn from all 15 EU member states. The UK was represented on the committee by DFID staff.
There are a multitude of individual projects in both sectors, each with different objectives and outcomes and many of which run over the course of several years and therefore have not been completed yet. I refer the hon. Member to the information available in the "2003 Annual Report from the European Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the EC Development Policy and the Implementation of External Assistance 2002" and the European Commission's website http://europa.eu.int for further details.
When considering Commission funding proposals, the Department took a wide range of factors into consideration, including likely cost-effectiveness and value for money. Any concerns about value for money were raised with the Commission. Many of the projects approved in 2002 are in the early stages of implementation. An assessment of the value for money will only be possible once the projects have been completed. The EC, through its results-orientated management system and strengthened evaluation systems, is best placed to carry out such an assessment.
§ Mr. BercowTo ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assessment he has made of the value for money provided by EU Official Development Assistance on(a) production sectors, (b) social infrastructure and services, (c) economic infrastructure and services and (d) multisector/cross-cutting projects in 2002 that was financed by the General Commission Budget and the European Development Fund; and on what criteria his assessment is based. [160709]
Mr. Gareth ThomasThere are a multitude of individual projects in the areas cited by the hon. Member, each with different objectives and outcomes and many of which run over the course of several years and therefore have not been completed yet. I refer the hon. Gentleman to the information available in the "2003 Annual Report from the European Commission 21W to the Council and the European Parliament on the EC Development Policy and the Implementation of External Assistance 2002" and the European Commission's website http://europa.eu.int for further details.
When considering Commission funding proposals, DFID took a wide range of factors into consideration, including likely cost effectiveness and value for money. Any concerns about value for money were raised with the Commission. Many of the projects approved in 2002 are in the early stages of implementation. An assessment of the value for money will only be possible once the projects have been completed. The EC, through its results-orientated management system and strengthened evaluation systems, is best placed to carry out such an assessment.
§ Mr. BercowTo ask the Secretary of State for International Development what his Department's involvement was in the(a) humanitarian aid, (b) food aid and (c) pre-accession, Malta, Cyprus, Turkey projects financed under the General Commission Budget in 2002; and what the outcome was in each case. [160710]
Mr. Gareth ThomasDFID was consulted during the drafting of strategic guidelines and priorities for funding in all three areas. The UK also participated in committee meetings that reviewed specific proposals. For example, DFID was represented at the Humanitarian Aid Committee which met monthly in 2002 to consider European Community Humanitarian Office (ECHO)'s draft funding decisions. Relevant DFID staff were consulted about individual proposals. Member states agreed ECHO'S overall 2002 strategy in late 2001.
There are a multitude of individual projects in the areas cited by the hon. Member, each with different objectives and outcomes and many of which run over the course of several years and therefore have not been completed yet. I refer the hon. Gentleman to the information available in the "2003 Annual Report from the European Commission to time Council and the European Parliament on the EC Development Policy and the Implementation of External Assistance 2002" and the European Commission's website http://europa.eu.int for further details.
§ Mr. BercowTo ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the objectives were of the(a) Latin America, (b) Asia and (c) pre-accession PHARE projects financed under the General Commission Budget in 2002; what his Department's involvement in each project was; what the outcome was; and what assessment he has made of value for money in each case. [160711]
Mr. Gareth ThomasThe overall objective of the many individual projects financed in Latin America and Asia is to promote human development. The objective of the PHARE programme is to help candidate countries' preparations to accede to the European Union. This consists of technical assistance with the implementation of the aquis communautaire, and the building of institutional capacity.
22WDFID was consulted during the drafting of strategic guidelines and priorities for funding in all three areas. DFID and/or other Government Departments also participated in committee meetings that reviewed specific proposals.
There are a multitude of individual projects in Asia, Latin America and the PHARE countries, each with different objectives and outcomes and many of which run over the course of several years and therefore have not been completed yet. I refer the hon. Member to the information available in the "2003 Annual Report from the European Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the EC Development Policy and the Implementation of External Assistance 2002" and the European Commission's website http://europa.eu.int for further details.
When considering Commission funding proposals, the Department took a wide range of factors into consideration, including likely cost-effectiveness and value for money. Any concerns about value for money were raised with the Commission. Many of the projects approved in 2002 are in the early stages of implementation. An assessment of the value for money will only be possible once the projects have been completed. The EC, through its results-orientated management system and strengthened evaluation systems, is best placed to carry out such an assessment.
§ Mr. BercowTo ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the objectives were of the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development(a) near and Middle East, (b) Mediterranean and (c) South Africa projects financed under the General Commission Budget in 2002; what his Department's involvement in each project was; what the outcome was; and what assessment he has made of value for money in each case. [160712]
Mr. Gareth ThomasThe European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD) was established to foster the transition towards open market-oriented economies, and to promote private and entrepreneurial initiative, in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and the Former Soviet Union. EBRD does not cover any of the regions identified in the hon. Gentleman's question.
§ Mr. BercowTo ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the objectives were of the(a) Western Balkans, (b) NIS and Mongolia/ CEECS and (c)NIS and Mongolia/TACIS projects financed under the General Commission Budget in 2002; what his Department's involvement in them was; what the outcome was; and what assessment he has made of their value for money. [160713]
Mr. Gareth ThomasThe objective of the Commission's programme of assistance to the Western Balkans (the CARDS programme) is to support the Stabilisation and Association Process in the region through reconstruction, work on democracy, human rights and the rule of law, economic and social development and promoting closer relations between recipient countries and between those countries and the EU. The objectives of the TACIS programme are to 23W promote the transition to a market economy and to reinforce democracy and the rule of law in the CIS countries.
Representatives of DFID sit on the Management Committees that oversee the Commission's implementation of these programmes. In addition proposals for spending in Serbia, Montenegro, Kosovo, Albania and FYROM are approved by the Governing Board of the European Agency for Reconstruction, on which DFID is also represented.
In both CARDS and TACIS, programmes funded under the 2002 Budget will typically last for at least three years. There are a multitude of individual projects in the areas cited by the hon. Member, each with different objectives and outcomes. I refer the hon. Member to the information available in the "2003 Annual Report from the European Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the EC Development Policy and the Implementation of External Assistance 2002" and the European Commission's website http://europa.eu.int for further details.
When considering Commission funding proposals, DFID took a wide range of factors into consideration, including likely cost-effectiveness and value for money. Any concerns about value for money were raised with the Commission. Many of the projects approved in 2002 are in the early stages of implementation. An assessment of the value for money will only be possible once the projects have been completed. The EC, through its results-orientated management system and strengthened evaluation systems, is best placed to carry out such an assessment.
§ Mr. BercowTo ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the outcome was of the(a) anti-personnel mines and (b) pre-accession ISPA projects financed from the General Commission Budget in 2002; and what his Department's involvement in each project was. [160714]
Mr. Gareth ThomasDFID was represented at the working groups that considered the projects presented by the European Commission to member states. There are a multitude of individual projects in the areas cited by the hon. Member each with different objectives and outcomes and many of which run over the course of several years and therefore have not been completed yet. I refer the hon. Gentleman to the information available in the "2003 Annual Report from the European Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the EC Development Policy and the Implementation of External Assistance 2002" and the European Commission's website http://europa.eu.int for further details.
§ Mr. BercowTo ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the objectives were of the(a) co-ordination and evaluation, (b) social infrastructure and services and (c) global health fund projects financed under the General Commission Budget in 2002; what his Department's involvement in the projects was; what the outcome was; and what assessment he has made of their value for money. [160715]
Mr. Gareth ThomasThe overall objective of the co-ordination and evaluation projects is to improve the long-term effectiveness of EC aid. Projects under the24W social infrastructure and services focus on reducing drug abuse. Global Health Fund projects support the Global Health Fund's aim to fight HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis.
When considering Commission funding proposals, DFID took a wide range of factors into consideration, including likely cost-effectiveness and value for money. Any concerns about value for money were raised with the Commission. Many of the projects approved in 2002 are in the early stages of implementation. An assessment of the value for money will only be possible once the projects have been completed. The EC, through its results-orientated management system and strengthened evaluation systems, is best placed to carry out such an assessment.
§ Mr. BercowTo ask the Secretary of State for International Development in respect of which projects financed under the General Commission Budget co-financing of non-governmental organisations took place in 2002. [160716]
Mr. Gareth ThomasA multitude of individual projects under the co-financing of non-governmental organisations budget line were implemented in 2002. I refer the hon. Gentleman to the information available in the "2003 Annual Report from the European Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the EC Development Policy and the Implementation of External Assistance 2002" and the European Commission's website http://europa.eu.int for further details.
§ Mr. BercowTo ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assessment he has made of the value for money provided by EU Official Development Assistance on(a) Action Relating to Debt and (b) Commodity Aid and the General Programme in 2002 financed by the General Commission Budget and the European Development Fund; and on what criteria his assessment is based. [160719]
Mr. Gareth ThomasWhen considering Commission funding proposals, DFID took a wide range of factors into consideration, including likely cost-effectiveness and value for money. Any concerns about value for money were raised with the Commission. Many of the projects approved in 2002 are in the early stages of implementation. An assessment of the value for money will only be possible once the projects have been completed. The EC, through its results-orientated management system and strengthened evaluation systems, is best placed to carry out such an assessment.
§ Mr. BercowTo ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assessment he has made of the value for money provided by EU Official Development Assistance devoted to emergency and distress relief in 2002; and on what criteria his assessment is based. [160720]
§ Hilary BennWhen considering Commission funding proposals, DFID took a wide range of factors into consideration, including likely cost-effectiveness and value for money. Any concerns about value for money were raised with the Commission. Many of the projects approved in 2002 have only recently been completed. 25W The EC's results-orientated management system and strengthened evaluation systems Will enable it to assess their value for money in due course.
§ Mr. BercowTo ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the objectives were of the pre-accession SAPARD project financed under the General Commission budget in 2002 and referred to as Item B7–0l in the financial tables on page 257 of the Annual Report 2003 from the European Commission to the Council and the European Parliament on the EC Development Policy and the implementation of external assistance in 2002; what his Department's involvement in the project was; what the outcome was; and what assessment he has made of its value for money. [161487]
Mr. Gareth ThomasThe Special Accession Programme for Agricultural and Rural Development (SAPARD) aims to help candidate countries deal with the problems of the structural adjustment in their agricultural sectors and rural areas, as well as in the implementation of the acquis communautaire concerning the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) and related legislation. DFID was consulted during the drafting of strategic guidelines and priorities for funding. DFID was also represented at committee meetings that reviewed proposals.
When considering Commission funding proposals, the Department took a wide range of factors into consideration, including likely cost-effectiveness and value for money. Any concerns about value for money were raised with the Commission. Many of the projects approved in 2002 are in the early stages of implementation. An assessment of the value for money will only be possible once the projects have been completed. The European Commission (EC), through its results-orientated management system and strengthened evaluation systems, is best placed to carry out such an assessment.