Allister questions EU spend
10 September 2008
"Whereas only the heartless would want to do nothing to help poverty and food shortages in Africa, the headline-grabbing decision of the EU Commission to urge use of €1B underspend from the agriculture budget in extra development aid, is questionable.
Under EU budgetary rules underspend should return to the contributing member states, of which the UK is the second largest. The Commission is trying to bounce both Parliament and the Council of Ministers to allow it to distribute it in Africa. Herein is a large part of the problem. The Commission's record on foreign aid is poor, both in terms of wastage on bureaucracy and misapplication of funds through lack of control. It's not hard to imagine how Mugabe will abuse any money earmarked for Zimbabwe and how Brussels' auditory arrangements will be powerless to stop him. Better, by far, if the money went back to the member states and was channelled through the development programme of each. Certainly, the UK has a development aid programme far superior to anything the EU has ever produced.
Last year the Commission wasted the underspend on the EU's pretentious Galileo space programme, this year, looking for a better headline, it's Africa, but, I fear, much of the spend will be wasted and ineffective. As Agriculture Chairman Neil Parish MEP said today, don't be surprised if only 10% of this aid actually gets to African farmers.
I must also observe that considering this money was originally earmarked for agricultural expenditure, it will be difficult for the EU's hard-pressed farmers, particularly after huge losses from flooding and runaway overheads, to understand why none of this money is coming to meet their real needs."
ENDS
