UK Presidency conclusions from tsunami follow-up event, 20 December 2005, Brussels
21 December 2005
The UK Presidency and the European Commission organised an exchange of views about the European Union's (EU's) humanitarian and reconstruction response to the 26 December 2004 Asian tsunami, with a focus on Indonesia, Sri Lanka and The Maldives.
Participants were from these three countries, the European Commission, the EU Council of Ministers, the United Nations, the World Bank, European non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and the International Federation of the Red Cross and Red Crescent.
The Chair of the meeting, UK International Development Minister Gareth Thomas, drew the following conclusions:
1. The affected regions and people - particularly in Sri Lanka, Indonesia and The Maldives - require continued large-scale international assistance. Much has been achieved in the last year, but it is important not to lose the sense of urgency.
2. The EU - including through the European Commission's Humanitarian Aid Directorate General, ECHO - and the international community responded quickly and effectively to meet basic humanitarian needs.
3. Further efforts are needed to ensure stronger coordination between different multilateral and bilateral agencies who respond to major disasters. Civil-military coordination and coordination with NGOs are priority areas. The EU could contribute to these efforts by continuing to implement the agreements made in Paris in March 2005 on aid effectiveness.
4. The EU and the United Nations (UN) worked effectively together during the humanitarian response to the tsunami, but this relationship can and should be developed further.
5. The international humanitarian architecture needs strengthening including through:
- providing adequate funding for the new UN Emergency Relief Fund
- boosting the role of UN humanitarian coordinators
- developing the UN cluster system, and
- better focusing UN Flash appeals on short-term needs.
6. The international response to future disasters could be improved by developing and using a common needs assessment. Needs assessments should be regularly updated, particularly when moving from the relief to the reconstruction phase.
7. The quality of leadership from authorities at all levels in affected countries has a major impact on the effectiveness of the aid response. From an early stage, donors need to support the development of effective and durable national, regional and local institutions to manage the relief and reconstruction process. Community participation in planning processes is also paramount.
8. Visa and customs regulations applied by affected governments can have a significant impact on international relief efforts.
9. While accountability is important for donors, and therefore a measure of visibility is needed, donors should minimise the burdens they impose on local actors.
10. The international community needs to be able to judge better its performance in order to improve accountability and the provision of relief for future disasters. Appropriate benchmarking should be developed.
11. More international investment in disaster risk reduction is required,
including through mainstreaming in relief and reconstruction work. Environmental
concerns also need to be fully factored into relief and reconstruction work.
12. Donors need to show flexibility when providing funding during the
transition between relief and reconstruction and need to adequately consider
medium - as well as short- and long-term needs, when they start planning their
response.
13. There has been impressive progress on reconstruction work, particularly in Indonesia and Sri Lanka in the housing and education sectors, despite initial difficulties and the enormous quantities of skilled labour and materials required.
14. Reconstruction work in parts of Sri Lanka has been hampered by the revision of the ‘buffer zone’ policy and non-implementation of the Post-Tsunami Operational Management Strategy. It is hoped that an alternative strategy can be found under the new government. Uncertainties over land titling have slowed progress in several countries and need to be resolved quickly.
15. The Multi Donor Trust Fund (MDTF) in Indonesia helped to facilitate and create the conditions in the government systems for on-budget reconstruction support. A review of this and other MDTFs, for example in Iraq and Afghanistan, could identify valuable lessons for the future.
16. Priority considerations for 2006 should include:
- a) Housing (in Indonesia a community led approach to reconstruction has laid a strong base for rapid reconstruction in 2006)
- b) Further development of livelihoods including through revitalising private sector activities such as tourism and helping affected countries take advantage of trade preference schemes
- c) Continuing to use reconstruction to support peace building activities in a conflict sensitive manner
- d) Equitable provision of reconstruction assistance, particularly to women and marginalized groups
- e) Addressing the reconstruction funding gap facing the Maldives.
17. A clear donor communication strategy directed at partners, recipients and the public in donor countries is needed to manage expectations about the delivery of assistance and the timescales involved: it is likely to take at least three to five years to complete reconstruction work in any one country.
18. Austria intends to take forward work on the EU Tsunami Action Plan and international humanitarian reform during its Presidency of the EU in 2006.
