Doc. 9734

14 March 2003

BUDGETS OF THE COUNCIL OF EUROPE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2004

Report

Committee on Economic Affairs and Development

Rapporteur: Mr Crema, Italy, Socialist Group

I.        Draft Opinion

1.        The Assembly welcomes the additional resources made available to the Organisation in 2003. These new funds, representing a positive outcome of the Committee of Ministers’ budgetary discussions, will assist the Secretary General of the Council of Europe in pursuing his continuing, courageous efforts to streamline internal working methods, make better use of existing resources and provide additional funds for the five main priorities, identified by the Committee of Ministers at its 104^th Session in Budapest in May 1999.

2.        Given the Council of Europe’s specific role in the new institutional architecture of Europe, it is crucial that member states’ governments continue to give it the human and financial resources needed to finance a wide array of activities aimed at combating the growth of terrorism, organised crime, corruption and illicit trafficking, which are generating an unhealthy climate of insecurity in several member states. Furthermore, additional resources are necessary to fund other important activities, aimed at preserving peace, consolidating democratic institutions, fostering political pluralism, promoting respect for human rights and the rule of law, providing legal assistance and combating social exclusion.

3.        The Assembly welcomes the new management policies introduced and implemented by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe in 2003, and wholeheartedly supports his proposed priorities for 2004 aimed at completing the Council of Europe’s enlargement process, continuing to assist South Eastern Europe and the Caucasus, as well as Moldova and Ukraine in their democratic and peaceful development, and introducing a multi-disciplinary approach to the Council of Europe’s programmes and activities so as to regroup the Organisation’s major functions and tasks in ten lines of action constituting its corporate mission.

4.        Considering the imminent enlargement process of the European Union and the work carried out within the European Convention, the Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers develop the closest possible links with the European Union as well as more diversified forms of co-operation, in particular as regards intergovernmental and assistance programmes.

5.        The Assembly deplores the fact that the Committee of Ministers has not agreed to the measures proposed by the Assembly in Opinions Nos. 224 (2001) and 236 (2002) to improve the Organisation’s precarious budgetary situation. These measures are:

i. co-ordinating the Organisation’s budgetary timetable with the national budgetary timetables of member states. In this regard, the Assembly believes that a study on prevailing budgetary procedures in the member states should be undertaken in the future. Such a change would enable governments to examine the Council of Europe’s budgetary needs in detail before taking any final decision on their forthcoming national budgets;

ii. given the major shortcomings and cumbersome nature of the current budgetary procedure, introducing a two-year system such as exists in other international organisations, as the Assembly has been proposing since 1996. The Assembly reiterates this request not only because the Committee of Ministers has so far failed to put forward convincing arguments against it, but also because it believes that a two-year system would enable the Organisation to plan and implement multi-annual projects, in particular as regards the consolidation of democratic institutions in central and eastern Europe, the protection of minorities and the fight against social exclusion;

iii. creating a special “Council of Europe” line within national budgets and allowing the ministries concerned, such as those responsible for cultural, education, legal and social matters, to contribute to the financing of certain intergovernmental activities, as the Assembly has been suggesting since 1996. Contributions to the Council of Europe come from allocations in the budgets of foreign affairs ministries labelled ‘contributions to international organisations’. The fact is that in most Council of Europe member states the lowest rate of budget growth in recent years has been precisely in the foreign affairs ministries, which explains why the Council of Europe’s justified requests for budgetary increases have been frustrated over the last four years;

iv. reviewing the criteria set out in Resolution (94) 31 so as to increase the weight of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) vis-à-vis the population factor for calculating the contribution scales of member states. This change would favour countries which, albeit highly populated, are per capita less wealthy. A further proposal would be to amend Resolution (94) 31 by including a clause setting a minimum contribution to be paid by each member state covering at least its being party to the European Court of Human Rights. In this context, the Assembly wishes to underline that any possible change in the criteria set out in Resolution (94) 31 should not be used to reduce the Organisation’s overall budget.

v. exploring additional methods of financing other than the traditional approach of seeking increased contributions from member states.

6.        Believing that the current, consensus-based, decision-making process of the Committee of Ministers has the effect of frustrating any effort to increase the Organisation’s human and financial resources, the Assembly encourages the Committee of Ministers to modify its modus operandi, in particular when it comes to taking decisions on the Council of Europe’s budget.

7.        Considering that its contributions in respect of the budgetary and administrative affairs of the Organisation have significantly helped the Committee of Ministers to identify new priority areas, the Assembly suggests that, in keeping with Recommendation 1344 (1997), joint decision-making powers be granted to the Assembly in setting the Organisation’s overall budget.

8.        The Assembly notes that the major share of the total budgetary growth for 2003, amounting to € 6 490 000 for the whole Organisation, has been allotted to the Court, which obtained additional funds totalling € 5 461 000. The Assembly fears that further increases in the European Court’s funding needs could be very detrimental to those of other Council of Europe activities if, in 2004 and 2005, the Committee of Ministers intends to finance the Court’s financial requests by reallocating the funds available within the Organisation’s ordinary budget. It is for this reason that the Assembly welcomes the Committee of Ministers’ approval in July 2002 of the 2003-2005 programme for the enhancement of the resources of the European Court of Human Rights and other departments involved in the execution of its judgments enabling member states to plan for the Court’s financial needs well in advance. This programme should ensure that member governments have already taken the necessary steps to increase the 2004 and 2005 budgets by the foreseen amounts in order to respond to the needs of the Court and other related departments without plundering the rest of the Organisation.

9.        The Assembly urges the Committee of Ministers to earmark adequate financial resources whenever it takes political decisions resulting in additional tasks to be undertaken by the Organisation. It welcomes the continuation of the financing of a Field Mission Reserve, amounting to € 1.5 million in 2003, which enables the Council of Europe to react swiftly to unforeseen political developments. It encourages the Committee of Ministers to continue to make provision for this Field Mission Reserve, as the method of financing via voluntary contributions is inadequate to ensure the financial coverage of unforeseen, albeit necessary, expenditure.

10.        The Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers carefully consider all the financial implications of new accessions. It therefore asks the Committee of Ministers to pay closer attention to the rising costs associated with treaty monitoring arrangements, in particular where new accessions place additional strain on human and financial resources, as pointed out in Assembly Opinions Nos 224 (2001) and 236 (2002).

11.        The Assembly encourages the Committee of Ministers to consider ways and means of providing assistance, where necessary, to the most disadvantaged countries whose own financial resources alone do not enable them to play an active part in the work of the Organisation. It therefore does not believe that the Committee of Ministers should use new accessions in order to reduce further the contributions of states which are already members.

12.        The Assembly invites the Committee of Ministers to consider carefully the difficult financial situation of the Organisation’s field offices, which form part of a strategy designed not only to better monitor the implementation and impact of the Council of Europe activities and programmes in the host countries, but also to develop further the Organisation’s co-operation with the countries concerned and other international institutions active in similar fields, as pointed out in Assembly Opinion No 236 (2002).

13.        In view of the Council of Europe’s observer status with the United Nations General Assembly and its fruitful and long-standing co-operation with United Nations bodies and specialised agencies, the Committee of Ministers should consider how a permanent presence for the Organisation in New York could be established in the future, as pointed out in Assembly Opinion Nos 224 (2001) and 236 (2002).

14. The Assembly believes that - as part of the ongoing restructuring of the Council of Europe aimed at prioritisation of activities and rationalisation of working methods - the Committee of Ministers should increase the resources available to ensure the necessary enhancement of the Organisation’s communications impact, through technological developments, an updated and efficient network of media contacts and a multi-lingual publications strategy. In this context, it welcomes the new press room, which provides the Organisation’s media and press directorate as well as invited journalists with modern equipment and up-to-date communication tools. Finally, the Assembly believes it is important to install in its Chamber a permanent system of automatic TV cameras which would benefit all parts of the Council of Europe, through improved Internet transmission and TV coverage of all events taking place in the Assembly Chamber.

15.        The Assembly welcomes the Committee of Ministers’ decision to set up a Pensions Reserve Fund, mainly financed from savings made through the switch to a private health insurance scheme, which would help member states meet their statutory obligation to pay the pensions of retired staff members.

16.        In the light of the criteria contained in the New Staff Policy, rightly initiated by the Secretary General, the Assembly recommends that the Committee of Ministers pay special attention to the principles of equal opportunity and fair geographical distribution in its future recruitment policy. The Assembly also asks the Committee of Ministers to take special measures, based on Resolution (92) 28, in respect of an early retirement scheme, in order to speed up the renewal of the Organisation’s human resources and to foster the systematic and efficient redeployment of staff. Finally, it asks the Committee of Ministers to increase the financial resources allocated to staff members’ training courses, which amount to only 0.35% of the Organisation’s ordinary budget.

17.        In view of the ongoing negotiations on future salary adjustments for all six co-ordinated organisations - Council of Europe, European Centre for Medium-range Weather Forecasts, European Space Agency, NATO, OECD and Western European Union -, the Assembly restates its view, already set out in Recommendation 1488 (2000), that an objective and mathematical method must be established in order to enable the Secretaries General of these six international institutions to recruit, retain and motivate highly trained, competent and independent staff. It is therefore crucial that staff remuneration remains competitive with regard to three recruitment markets, namely the private sector, national civil services and international civil servants, also including the European Union, as pointed out in Assembly Opinion No 236 (2002).

II.        Explanatory memorandum by the Rapporteur

1. The Assembly’s annual opinions on Council of Europe budgets have over the years provided parliamentarians with a deeper insight into the Organisation and its political evolution. The primary aim of these reports is to make recommendations on the Council’s activities, with a view to examining the political implications of decisions taken by the Committee of Ministers with regard to the Organisation’s overall budget.

2. The present report takes into account the exchange of views which the Rapporteur had with representatives of the Administration and of the Private Office of the Secretary General of the Council of Europe. It is to be noted that, at the time of writing, few official documents on budgetary prospects for the year 2004 were available.

3. First of all, the Rapporteur welcomes the new management policies introduced and implemented by the Secretary General of the Council of Europe, who is genuinely committed to further improving the efficiency and the effectiveness of the Organisation’s internal functioning and programmes of activity. In 2003, the impact of intergovernmental action was enhanced by putting increased emphasis on complementarity between different sectors, in particular by further developing in-house co-operation. Moreover, a new project management methodology was introduced to contribute to objective-based planning and defining evaluation criteria.

4. As regards the implementation of the New Staff Policy, in 2003 the Council of Europe has integrated a large number of long-serving temporary staff members, who have passed the competitive examination, created 96 posts¹ (77 of which for a three-year period) as part of the enhancement of the activities associated with the European Court of Human Rights, and developed the practice of linking fixed term contracts to programmes of activity, as required by the Committee of Ministers in the follow-up to the Wise Persons’ report.

5. Another important remark concerns the setting up, as from 1 January 2003, of a Pensions Reserve Fund, mainly financed from savings made through the switch to a private health insurance scheme, which would help member states meet their statutory obligation to pay the pensions of retired staff members.

6. Following the budgetary and administrative proposals made in its Recommendations 918 (1981), 1155 (1991) and 1344 (1997), the Assembly notes with satisfaction that some progress has been made towards a more direct and genuine dialogue between its representatives and the Committee of Ministers on budgetary matters. Yet, the Committee of Ministers has so far been unable to meet the modest staffing requests put forward by the Assembly, whose tasks and responsibilities have grown significantly over the years.

7. The Rapporteur welcomes the additional resources made available to the Organisation in 2003, in particular to the European Court of Human Rights. These new funds, representing a positive outcome of the Committee of Ministers’ budgetary discussions, will assist the Secretary General of the Council of Europe in pursuing his continuing, courageous efforts to streamline internal working methods, make better use of existing resources and provide additional funds for the five strategic objectives set out by the Committee of Ministers at its 104^th Session in Budapest in May 1999:

      - Protecting and furthering the cause of human rights in all member states on a

       non-discriminatory basis;

      - Encouraging the setting up and development of democratic institutions and

       procedures at national, regional and local level;

      - Ensuring respect for the rule of law;

      - Favouring a European cultural identity, with due regard for Europe’s cultural

       diversity and heritage, with special emphasis on the role of education;

      - Promoting tolerance, social cohesion and social rights.

8. The tragic events of 11 September have added dramatically to the intensity of the political debate and relevant new laws are under consideration in most member states and at European Union level. As a result, the Council of Europe, which attaches great importance to the fight against terrorism and other forms of crime, included these activities in its 2002 and 2003 priorities. Furthermore, the Organisation had to increase the proportion of the budgetary appropriations allocated to the security of its buildings.

9. In 2003, the Council of Europe also decided to place more emphasis on the following political priorities, within the limit of the budgetary funds available, which amount to over € 175 million:

-       Maintaining the effectiveness of the Council of Europe’s activities and

instruments to protect human rights;

-       Enhancing the Council of Europe’s role in the “new European architecture” brought about by the enlargement and continuing integration of the European Union and further developing the Common Foreign and Security Policy within the Council of Europe;

-       Combating terrorism while ensuring respect of human rights by a) strengthening existing and developing new legal instruments, and b) contributing to multicultural and inter-faith dialogue at all levels of society in Europe, with our neighbours and in co-operation with other organisations, in particular the United Nations and UNESCO world-wide;

-       Highlighting and reinforcing activity on migration issues;

-       Maintaining the Council of Europe’s capacity for action on the ground to respond to urgent needs in member states;

-       Strengthening the linkage between monitoring activities and co-operation programmes;

-       Mainstreaming youth-oriented activities by developing the youth dimension across the full range of the Council of Europe’s programmes and activities.

10.        Walter Schwimmer, Secretary General of the Council of Europe, in his speech delivered on 28 January 2003 before the Parliamentary Assembly, put forward a broad outline of his priorities for 2004, which would enable the Organisation to complete its enlargement process, make its internal functioning more focused and efficient, and improve the effectiveness and the quality of the Council of Europe’s programmes of activity so as to be able to face the new challenges successfully. There priority areas are:

- Completing the Council of Europe’s enlargement process;

- Continuing to assist South Eastern Europe and the Caucasus, as well as

      Moldova and Ukraine;

- Introducing a multi-disciplinary approach to the Council of Europe’s programmes

and activities so as to regroup the Organisation’s major functions and tasks in ten lines of action which would constitute its corporate mission.

11. At this point, it is important to list these ten new lines of action: compliance with human rights and rule of law standards, human rights in public policy, pluralistic democracy and good governance, building a society based on the rule of law, technological development, human dignity and democracy, building stable and cohesive societies, European cultural identity and diversity, human dignity and sustainable development, Europe’s future through education and youth, and the Council of Europe’s outreach policy, which concerns its field and information offices active in several member states. This new approach will enable the Council of Europe not only to develop more systematic analyses based on the findings of the monitoring mechanisms but also to devise and implement policies designed to solve the problems and reduce the shortcomings identified by these complex procedures. Moreover, the Rapporteur believes that regular assessment of the results of the monitoring processes will raise both the quality and the effectiveness of the Council of Europe’s programmes of activity, thereby increasing their overall impact on the countries concerned.

12. The Rapporteur wishes to make a remark on the Information Offices of the Council of Europe (IOCEs), which have been set up by the Committee of Ministers at the request of various central and east European countries. Their aim, inter alia, is to disseminate information on the Council of Europe, its activities, its working methods and standards, to help individuals, NGOs and political institutions to contact the Council of Europe, to contribute and support the implementation of co-operation programmes and other Council of Europe projects in the host countries, and to facilitate the co-operation of the Council of Europe with other international organisations active in similar fields. Although these offices play an increasingly important role in promoting the Council of Europe’ activities, the appropriations for 2003, covering the cost of 55 staff members and the operational expenditure of the 22 IOCEs active in 17 member states, were only € 1.8 million. These limited funds, which have been left essentially unchanged since 2001, are not consistent with the increased number of IOCEs and the tasks assigned to them and should be raised in order to cover fully their growing administrative and operational costs.

13. Special attention should also be paid to ways of avoiding a situation where the European Court of Human Rights consumes the lion’s share of the Organisation’s resources – whether new or existing. This can hardly have been envisaged either by the founding fathers of the Council of Europe or by the authors of the Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, let alone by the various Council of Europe Summits of Heads of State or Government that have steadily added new tasks to the Organisation’s agenda. Moreover, the Rapporteur is convinced that the Court, being the European body entrusted with the protection of human rights throughout the continent, should receive increased obligatory contributions enabling the Court to meet its ever-growing structural needs. This concern is based on the findings of the Council of Europe Evaluation Group which on 27 September 2001 submitted a comprehensive report on the financial situation of the European Court of Human Rights and the information that, in November 2001, the Sub-committee on Budgetary Affairs gathered in the course of an ad hoc meeting with Ambassador Justin Harman, Chairman of the Council of Europe Evaluation Group on the Court of Human Rights, Mrs Maud de Boer Buquicchio, at the time Deputy Registrar of the European Court of Human Rights and now Deputy Secretary General of the Council of Europe, Mr Bruno Haller, Secretary General of the Parliamentary Assembly and Mr Alan Todd, Head of the Finance Directorate of the Council of Europe to discuss and examine this pressing issue in detail.

14. In the course of that meeting, Ambassador Harman said, inter alia, that the estimated number of applications registered with the Court would be 14 655 in 2002 and 20 720 in 2005. Thus in the five-year period from 2000 to 2005 there would be an overall increase of nearly 100%. Immediate action was indispensable if the Court were to continue functioning and retain its credibility and authority. The Evaluation Group had concluded that by the target year 2005 a substantial increase in the staffing level of the Court would be required to deal with the anticipated heavier case-load. To cope with this unpredictable situation, the need for additional posts was estimated at 76 lawyers to process cases, and 56 secretaries.

15. While welcoming the great interest taken by the Committee of Ministers in the financing of the European Court of Human Rights, the Rapporteur fears that further increases in the Court’s funding needs will be detrimental to those of other Council of Europe activities, given the persistent budgetary constraints. In fact, the major share of the total budgetary growth for 2003, amounting to € 6 490 000 for the whole Organisation, has been allotted to the European Court of Human Rights, which obtained additional funds totalling € 5 461 000. As a consequence, only € 1 029 000 was made available to meet the needs of the other Council of Europe’s important activities. Moreover, the Rapporteur still wonders how the

Committee of Ministers plans to meet the Court’s additional financial needs without damage to other important activities, which have over the last five years seen a sharp decrease in resources.

16. Against this background, the Rapporteur wishes to underscore the inadequacy of the Council’s present financing mechanisms. In fact a growing number of member states are having great difficulty in keeping up with their annual contributions, a situation which has even prompted the Committee of Ministers to mention the possible application of Article 9 of the Council of Europe’s Statute. This article could be applied to any member state which had failed to fulfil all or part of its financial obligations for a period of two years, unless that failure was justified by exceptional circumstances.

17. The prolonged budgetary austerity has given rise to a striking disparity between the financial resources allocated to the Council as a whole and its growing commitments, as decided upon by the Committee of Ministers itself or by Council of Europe Summits. By way of example, in the intergovernmental co-operation sector funds have been internally reallocated towards the new multidisciplinary integrated projects in order to give priority activities more resources. For some activities, however, this exercise has not achieved the desired result.

18. Given the Council of Europe’s specific role in the new institutional architecture of Europe, it is crucial that member states continue to give it additional resources to finance activities aimed at combating the growth of terrorism, organised crime, corruption and illicit trafficking, which are generating an unhealthy climate of insecurity in several member states. Moreover, in the struggle against racism, anti-Semitism, xenophobia and intolerance the Council of Europe’s legal instruments should be further strengthened.

19. Although voluntary contributions are welcome additional resources for the Organisation, they cannot replace obligatory contributions in the financing of multi-disciplinary and multi-annual projects. In fact, voluntary contributions are always generous at the start of all programmes but tend to diminish in subsequent years. By way of example, activities in Kosovo, Serbia and Montenegro and Chechnya, which were funded by voluntary contributions at the outset, are now mainly financed from the Organisation’s limited ordinary budget, thereby placing an additional strain on existing resources. This is all the more regrettable as strengthening peace and stability across our continent should be the main objective for all member states interested in making Europe a broad area of democratic security based on shared values. The Council of Europe’s expertise and experience in a wide range of co-operation sectors genuinely represent a unique asset among European political organisations.

20. In this context, it is important to point out that contributions to the Council come more or less entirely from allocations in the budgets of foreign affairs ministries for ‘contributions to international organisations’ or a similarly worded heading. The reason why the Council of Europe’s justified requests for budgetary increases have been frustrated over the last four years is therefore clear. The fact is that, in most Council of Europe member states the lowest rate of budget growth in recent years has been precisely in the foreign affairs ministries. The Rapporteur therefore believes that it is urgent to create a special “Council of Europe” line within national budgets and to allow the ministries concerned, such as those responsible for social, cultural and legal matters, to contribute to the financing of certain intergovernmental activities, as the Assembly has been proposing since 1996. By way of example, expenditure under Vote V, “Expenditure of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe”, could be charged to the budgets of the ministries responsible for devolved government.

21. Another problem concerns Resolution (94) 31 fixing the scale of member states’ contributions to the Council of Europe ordinary budget. Contributions to the ordinary budget are based on a formula that mainly takes account of the population and GDP of member states, giving a weighting of 5 to GDP and 1 to population. This formula indeed aggravates the budgetary position of less wealthy countries. It is for this reason that the Rapporteur believes that it is important to review the criteria set out in Resolution (94) 31 so as to increase the weight of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) vis-à-vis the population factor for calculating the contribution scales of member states. This change would favour countries which, albeit highly populated, are per capita less wealthy. This proposal would result in a Council of Europe funded in a way which fairly reflects the economic weight of each member state. A further proposal would be to amend the present resolution by including a clause setting a minimum contribution to be paid by each member state covering at least its being party to the European Court of Human Rights. In this context, the Rapporteur wishes to underline that any possible change in the criteria set out in Resolution (94) 31 should not be used to reduce the Organisation’s overall budget.

22. As regards the Assembly’s budgetary proposals for the year 2004 and against the background of its rapidly increasing workload, it is essential for the Council of Europe in general and the Secretariat of the Assembly in particular to have greater resources for retaining and motivating its highly qualified permanent staff and for engaging temporary staff for specific projects and activities. Moreover, fresh resources should be allocated to defending and promoting the Council of Europe’s fundamental values and principles through intergovernmental co-operation and assistance programmes, particularly in the constitutional, legal and democratic institution-building fields.

23. The Rapporteur wishes to draw the Committee of Ministers’ attention to three additional budgetary aspects. The first concerns the additional costs associated with the launching of multi-disciplinary and multi-annual projects, the Organisation’s enhanced capacity to undertake action on the ground and treaty monitoring arrangements, including the improvement of the Committee of Ministers' machinery for following up judgments of the European Court of Human Rights. The recent political crises in several new member states have highlighted the urgency of financing programmes targeting activities relating to democratic security, where the Council of Europe’s achievements and expertise would be an asset. Specific budgetary provision is also required for the ongoing monitoring of existing conventions. Additional ratifications of various conventions in the course of 2003 as a result of the accession of new member states will place serious additional strain on the Organisation’s already over-stretched human and financial resources.

24. The second comment relates to the funds made available to the Organisation for staff members’ training courses, which are an essential part of their career development. In 2003, the financial resources allocated to training programmes amounted to € 612 000, which corresponds to € 340 per staff member or 0.35% of the Organisation’s ordinary budget. The Rapporteur therefore believes that it is crucial to increase, in the coming years, these funds so as to meet the legitimate training needs of staff members, who are called upon to take up new challenges and tasks.

25. The third and final remark that needs to be made is more general. In recent years many political decisions taken by the Committee of Ministers have made no provision for the additional financial resources needed to implement them – the Committee no doubt assuming that rationalising and improving the use of existing resources would be sufficient to cover the cost of such new activities. Furthermore, the Committee of Ministers should carefully consider all the financial implications arising from the accession of new member states. In fact, assisting member States in coping with emerging social and political problems is an integral part of the Plan of Action adopted at the Strasbourg Summit in 1997. The purpose is to enable all European member states to participate on an equal footing in the European project.

26. Increasing the budgetary resources of the Council of Europe should become one of the Assembly’s main challenges vis-à-vis the Committee of Ministers in the years to come, in particular in the light of the Secretary General’s priorities for the Council of Europe from 2001 to 2005. The Organisation intends to plan and implement a number of activities, including inter alia the promotion and proper functioning of democratic institutions, the protection of minorities, the fight against terrorism, corruption, individual insecurity and social exclusion, the reinforcement of control mechanisms in the European human rights field, and the development of co-operation with the European Union, the OSCE and the United Nations. In view of the fruitful and long-standing co-operation with the United Nations and its

specialised agencies, the Rapporteur believes that the Committee of Ministers should consider how a permanent presence for the Organisation in New York could be established in the future, as pointed out in Assembly Opinion Nos 224 (2001) and 236 (2002).

27. Given the budgetary prospects for the 2004 budget, the Rapporteur doubts not only whether the 2003 budget will permit the Council of Europe to carry out its expanding tasks and implement the decisions and proposals of the 2^nd Summit of Heads of State and Government, but also whether the available resources are consistent with the Organisation’s new geographical scope, achievements and expertise. The Council’s key role of defending human rights and the rule of law gives it a political responsibility for the democratic and peaceful development of Europe. This important political responsibility must be given more substance, in particular through increased human and financial resources.

Reporting committee: Committee on Economic Affairs and Development

Reference to committee: standing mandate.

Draft opinion unanimously adopted by the committee on 11 March 2003.

Members of the committee: Mrs Zapfl-Helbling (Chairperson), Mr Kirilov, ZZ …, Mrs Burbiene (Vice-chairpersons), Mr Açikgöz, Mr Adam, Mr Agius, Mr Agramunt, Mr I. Aliyev, Mr Anacoreta Correia, Mr Andov, Mr Arnau, Mr Assis Miranda, Mr Ates, Mr Berceanu, Mr Braun, Mr Brunhart, Mr Budin, Mr Çavusoglu, Mr Cosarciuc, Mr Crema, Mr Djupedal, Mr Duivesteijn, Mr Elo, Mr Eyskens, Mr Figel, Mr Floros, Mr Galchenko (Alternate: Ms Yarygina), Mr Galoyan, Ms Griffiths, Mr Grignon, Mr Gusenbauer, Ms Hakl (Alternate: Mr Grissemann), Mr Haupert, Mr Högmark, Mr Jonas, Mr Kacin, Mrs Kestelijn-Sierens, Mr Klympush, Mr Korobeynikov, Mr Kraus, Mr Lachnit, Mr Le Guen, Mr Leibrecht, Mr Liapis, Mr Makhachev, Mr Masseret, Mr Melcak, Mr Mikkelsen, Ms Milicevic, Mr Naumov, Mr Öhman, Mr O’Keeffe (Alternate: Mr Mooney), Mrs Patarkalishvili, Mrs Pericleous-Papadopoulos, Mrs Pintat Rossell, Mr Podgorski, Mr Popa, Mr Puche, Mrs Ragnarsdottir, Mr Ramponi, Mr Reimann (Alternate: Mr Frey), Mr Riccardi, Mr Rivolta, Lord Russell-Johnston, Mr Rybak, Mr Schreiner, Mr Severin, Mr Seyidov, Mr Slakteris, Ms Smith, Mr Stefanov, Mr Tepshi, Mr Torbar, Mrs Vadai, Mr Voog, Mr Walter, Mr Wielowieyski, Mr Wikinski, Mr Zhevago (Alternate: Mr Poroshenko), Mr Zvonar.

N.B. The names of those members present at the meeting are printed in italics

Head of Secretariat: Mr Torbiörn

Co-Secretaries to the committee: M. Bertozzi, Ms Ramanauskaite and Ms Kopaçi-Di Michele

¹ These posts have been created in the Court itself with the exception of 2 posts in the Committee of Ministers and 5 posts in the Court Judgements section in Directorate-General II.