Brussels, 02 March 2017
DOCUMENT PARTIALLY ACCESSIBLE
TO THE PUBLIC
WK 1737/2017 REV 1 ADD 9
LIMITE
DEVGEN
RELEX
WORKING PAPER
This is a paper intended for a specific community of recipients. Handling and
further distribution are under the sole responsibility of community members.
WORKING DOCUMENT
From:
To:
Working Party on Development Cooperation
Subject:
European Consensus on Development - Presidency revised draft
- Comments by
Delegations will find enclosed for information the comments from
on the revised proposal for the
new European Consensus on Development.
WK 1737/2017 REV 1 ADD 9
LIMITE
EN
2nd March 2017
COMMENTS TO THE PRESIDENCY REVISED PROPOSAL FOR
THE NEW EUROPEAN CONSENSUS ON DEVELOPMENT (WK 1737/2017 REV 1)
General Comments
•
commends the efforts of the Presidency to combine many constructive comments from MS
and interesting elements from the EP report on a comprehensive text based on the COM proposal.
• The result is however quite long, and in some parts lacks readability. Some paras could be shortened
in their descriptive parts, when these are not directly linked to action-oriented proposals. To
improve communicability, highlighting main word/words on each para could be a way out.
• We support the decision to keep the boxes, and to make their essence clearer by using the title “A
Key Driver for Achieving Sustainable Development Goals”. Under this title, the box on
Sustainable
Energy and Climate Change should be renamed, as Climate Change cannot be considered a key
driver for achieving SDGs.
• Drawing on Agenda 2030, we would like to see more emphasis on the principle of leaving no one
behind, in particular on fighting inequalities (to be added i.a. in para 60 and 66, as a source of
instability, and in para 95 on MICs).
• We also favour a more assertive reference to the planet limits, and a specific para on the
relationship between economic development and the environment.
• The first sections (para 1-17) should set the standard about the new EU Development Policy, aligned
with the new international development agenda. Key crosscutting issues should be mentioned there:
gender (already there), digitalisation (not yet), global public goods (was on COM communication, is
lacking here), PCD (already mentioned in para 10, but could be developed as a value of EU external
action, and a great EU contribution to Agenda 2030).
• We appreciate the references to regional actors, the example of the EU as a regional project of
peace and prosperity could be enhanced.
• On the geographical scope, although Africa must stay high on the EU development agenda for
obvious reasons, we should not shy away from our global ambition, along the lines of the EUGS. In
that sense, tailor-made development cooperation with all kind of developing countries should be
enshrined in the Consensus. Latin America, as the closest area to Europe in terms of shared values
and principles, should be explicitly mentioned.
Detailed comments
•
appreciates new references to children, in particular in para 29, that enrich the text.
• We also commend the drafting on women as agents of peace, including in conflict prevention and
resolution (box and para 65). It helps to underline the security-development nexus, thus highlighting
SDG 16
• We welcome the new para on Culture (para 34), but it could be improved insisting on the double
role of culture, as both driver and enabler of development. Alternative drafting:
34. The EU and its Member States recognise the role played by culture as both a driver and an enabler for in development
and conflict prevention. Culture facilitates social inclusion, freedom of expression, identity building, and civil empowerment
and conflict prevention, while strengthening economic growth. They wil promote cultural diversity and heritage and wil
support cultural policies where these would help achieve the objective of promoting sustainable development while taking
local circumstances into account.
• On vulnerable groups (para 30), we would appreciate a reference to UN Convention on the Rights of
Persons with Disabilities, as it is an (almost) universally accepted legal instrument.
• On inclusive growth (para 36), together with improved access to factors of production, we should
stress equal access to opportunities and basic social services.
• On Migration, we support the inclusion of all paras but one in People section. We would like to
highlight the positive impact of migration in development, not only through financial remittances but
also through
social and cultural remittances. Additional y:
o On para 38, drafting should be revised in order to avoid confusion between migration and
forced displacement
o On para 72, we should avoid putting on same foot
smuggling and trafficking in human beings
with
other sorts of trafficking
• On the Prosperity section,
o para 50 could be shortened as many ideas are already in the new para 49, on MSMEs, that
we appreciate.
o We miss a clear reference to microfinance
o We would like to see a clear commitment by the EU to foster companies engagement with
SDGs; this should go beyond SCR and change EU businesses’ models
o On para 56, we miss a mention to value chains in agriculture
• On the nexus Humanitarian-Development:
o the text could be enriched by a reference to protracted crisis in MICs.
o Para 66 first sentence should be reviewed, not to mix humanitarian needs with development
cooperation response.
o Para 70 is could be improved by a reference to the Grand Bargain.
• On Peacebuilding and state-building, para 67, we support the text as it is now.
• On Partnerships, criteria should be set on the opportunity for the EU/MS to establish concrete
partnerships with any stakeholder. Its objectives should also be specified. Additional y:
o Para 73: add
private sector and
academia
o Para 76: add
added value in “Working together, the EU and its MS will develop strategic
responses grounded in shared knowledge, lessons learnt,
added value and joint analysis of
the country context”
o Para 80: it is a good idea to establish clear criteria for TF, in order to bring them more in line
with the aid effectiveness principles. A reference to increased ownership could be added.
o Para 90: a sentence related to multilateral financing could be added:
“Wel -designed pooled
funds are drivers of integration across organizations, SDGs and sectors. The EU and its
Member States will look at ways of stimulating joint funding mechanisms”.
o Box on “
Innovative Engagement with more Advanced Developing Countries”: we support
both content and form. It is very much aligned with Agenda 2030, and responds to some
gaps in our EU Development Cooperation, recently highlighted by the EFIs evaluation
• On Means of Implementation, the AAAA different chapters should be addressed, stressing how the
EU will engage, how they would be prioritised. Debt relief could be better described, and be linked
to development priorities.
• Finally, on section 5, para 121, we appreciate the innovative reference to Global citizenship
education. Taking into account other MS comments, we would agree to a reference to “Global
Education”, as described in the Global Education Network Europe:
“Global Education is education
that opens people’s eyes and minds to the realities of the world, and awakens them to bring about a
world of greater justice, equity and human rights for all. GE is understood to encompass Development
Education, Human Rights Education, Education for Sustainability, Education for Peace and Conflict
Prevention and Intercultural Education; being the global dimensions of Education for Citizenship”