¹ According to the European Commission, Memorandum on the Community's Development Aid in 1994 (Brussels, 1995) disbursements under the Lomé Convention amounted to 39, 56, 40, and 44 per cent of all EU aid expenditure in the years 1991 to 1994, respectively. Aid under the Lomé Convention is financed from the European Development Fund, raised separately every five years by EU member-states, while aid for non-ACP programmes is financed out of the general EU budget, as is assistance for sectoral programmes (including food aid and emergency relief) which are available to all countries, including the ACP.Google Scholar

² Interview with European Commission official in Brussels, December 1994.

³ The new structural adjustment fund totalled 1·15 million Ecu (the European currency unit), amounting to almost 10 per cent of the total European Development Fund (EDF 7), and almost 20 per cent of the amount allocated to national and regional programmes. In the second financial protocol of Lomé IV (EDF 8), the structural adjustment fund totalled Ecu 1·4 million.

⁴ A comprehensive summary of the outcomes of the Mid-Term Review, including trade co-operation, can be found in EURO-CIDSE News Bulletin (Brussels), 07–08 1995Google Scholar , and in The Courier (Brussels), 153, 09–10 1995.Google Scholar In addition, The Courier, 155, January–February 1996, contains the complete text of the revised Lomé Convention, highlighting the amendments. As regards trade, suffice to say here that, whereas the EU had no proposals to alter the existing provisions, the ACP states negotiated some improved access to EU markets, achieving limited reductions in tariffs or increases in quotas on some agricultural products, generally amounting to about 50 per cent of what they sought.

⁵ Council of Ministers (Development), European Union, Resolution on ‘Human Rights, Democracy and Development’, Brussels, 28 November 1991.

⁶ Without a suspension clause, legal implementation would be through the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, Articles 60 and 65, which involve a three-month delay and the possibility of objections by the ACP state concerned.

⁷ However, any Party resorting to this measure undertakes ‘to consult with the other expeditiously’, according to Annex LXXXIII to Lomé IV, as revised in November 1995.

⁸ EURO–CIDSE News Bulletin, January–February 1996, p. 14.

⁹ European NGO networks were involved in a Lomé Mid-Term Review joint project, drawing up a position paper and making recommendations to the EU. Ibid. May 1994.

¹⁰ Ibid. May 1994, p. 19.

¹¹ Interview with Commission official, December 1994.

¹² EURO–CIDSE News Bulletin, September 1994, p. 18.

¹³ Cited in ibid.

¹⁴ Price Waterhouse, Study of the Causes of Delay in the Implementation of Financial and Technical Cooperation (London, 1992), often known as the ‘Post-Fiji’ study.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Cited in Bossuyt, J., Laporte, G., and Brigaldino, G., European Development Policy after the Treaty of Maastricht (Maastricht, European Centre for Development Policy Management, 1993), p. 44.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Capacity problems at the European Commission were highlighted in Price Waterhouse, op. cit., and subsequently by other sources. According to the House of Lords, Select Committee on the European Communities, EC Development Aid (London, 1993), paras. 60–2 and 65ffGoogle Scholar , the Commission was overstretched. Bossuyt et al. op. cit. p. 45, consider possible remedies to the ‘recurrent problems of understaffing at all levels’.

¹⁷ This is one of the conclusions in a forthcoming report on aid to encourage political reform in Kenya: Ngunyi, Mutahi, Promoting Democracy Through Positive Conditionality (Centre for Democratization Studies, University of Leeds, 1996).Google Scholar

¹⁸ See European Research Office/One World Action, Achieving Greater Participation in the Programing Process Under Lomé (Brussels, 1995).Google Scholar

¹⁹ The British Government reduced its contribution from Ecu 1,791 million in the first financial protocol to Ecu 1,630 million in the second, not taking inflation of 21.5 per cent into account, a decrease from 16.37 to 12.25 per cent of the total amount. EURO—CIDSE News Bulletin, June 1995, p. 19.

²⁰ Overseas Development Institute, EU Aid Post-Maastricht: fifteen into one? (London, 04 1995), p. 1.Google Scholar

²¹ European Commission, op. cit. p. 17.

²² Ibid. p. 7. This compares with Ecu 4,230 million for the period 1978–1991. Ibid. p. 19.

²³ Randel, Judith and German, Tony (eds.), The Reality of Aid 1995: an independent review of international aid (London, 1995), p. 100.Google Scholar

²⁴ Interview with Carl Greenidge, Acting Secretary-General of the ACP Group, in The Courier 155, January–February 1996.

²⁵ Stokke, Olav (ed.), Aid and Political Conditionality (London, 1995), p. 75.Google Scholar

²⁶ Financial Times (London), 3 11 1994.Google Scholar

²⁷ Randel and German (eds.), op. cit. p. 100.

²⁸ OECD Development Assistance Committee, 1994 Report, Development Co-operation: efforts and polices of the members of the Development Assistance Committee (Paris, 1995), Table 40.Google Scholar The figure of 70 per cent includes disbursements to sub-Saharan Africa from sectoral programmes under budgetary aid – for example, emergency and food aid.

²⁹ Randel and German, op. cit. p. 100.