23rd MEETING OF THE WBIF PROJECT FINANCERS GROUP. 16 to 17 May 2017, Brussels, Belgium. Final Minutes of Meeting

Transcription

1 23rd MEETING OF THE WBIF PROJECT FINANCERS GROUP 16 to 17 May 2017, Brussels, Belgium Final Minutes of Meeting Day 1: Project Oriented Session Welcoming The Project Financiers Group (PFG) Co-chairs (CEB, Vitomir Miles Raguz and DG NEAR, Wolfgang Schläger) welcomed participants to the 23 rd PFG by recapping on the various challenges that WBIF stakeholders have overcome in the past two years. The WBIF revised governance structure is now firmly in place and the TA and INV Rounds are well under way. The last formal issues can now be finalised; these concern adjustments to the Technical Assistance (TA) - and Investment (INV) Grant Application Forms (GAF), the Guidelines, and the Vademecum, which will be presented at the next WBIF SC meeting in Stockholm. The preparations for the Trieste Summit in July are also under way. Screening and Assessment of TA Round 17 Projects DG NEAR (Wolfgang Schläger) reminded participants of the eligibility criteria for TA Round 17: Transport (TRA) and Energy (ENE) projects must have a clear regional dimension, or unblock an existing project. In addition, TRA projects must relate to the Core Network whilst no restrictions were applied to submissions in the Environment (ENV) and Social (SOC) sectors. Against this background, the following grant requests were received: Number of applications received: 24; Total grant amount requested: 22.6 million; Applications per country: ALB 6, BiH 5, KOS 4, MKD 1, MNE 6, SRB 2; Applications per sector: TRA 8, ENE 3, ENV 7, SOC 6. Totals No. Grant (revised) Total positive 11 10,000,000 Total TBD 1 1,300,000 Total negative 12 11,361,300 Grand total 24 22,661,300 1

2 Below listed are the positively screened and assessed grant applications: Grant ID Code 1 WB17- ALB-ENE WB17- REG-ENE WB17-SRB- ENE-02 4 WB17- ALB-ENV WB17-BIH- ENV-01* 6 WB17- KOS-SOC WB17- MKD-SOC WB17- ALB-TRA WB17- ALB-TRA WB17-BIH- TRA WB17- KOS-TRA WB17- MNE-TRA- 01 Abbreviated Name Sector Lead IFI Grant [ ] (revised) Funding Source HPP Skavica ENE EBRD 1,500,000 IPF Over voltage WB6 Energy efficiency in public buildings Buna river - Skadar lake national park WATSAN Federation of BIH Upgrading physical infrastructure healthcare Prison reconstruction ENE KFW 1,040,000 IPF ENE KFW 800,000 Joint Fund ENV EBRD 400,000 IPF ENV EIB 1,300,000 IPF SOC EIB 260,000 IPF SOC CEB 1,100,000 IPF Durres Port TRA EBRD 1,100,000 IPF Lezha by-pass TRA EBRD 350,000 IPF Project Monitoring Corridor V Svilaj Rail Pristina airport Vrbnica - Bar signalling and landslide TRA EIB 350,000 IPF TRA EBRD 1,100,000 IPF TRA EIB 2,000,000 IPF Total 11,300,000 * conditional upon BiH adopting the ENV strategy. 2

3 The following applications were screened and assessed negative: ID Grant Code 1 WB17-ALB- ENV-03 2 WB17-MNE- ENV-01 3 WB17-MNE- ENV-02 4 WB17-MNE- ENV-03 5 WB17-MNE- ENV-04 6 WB17-ALB- SOC-04 7 WB17-BIH- SOC-01 8 WB17-KOS- SOC-01 9 WB17-MNE- SOC WB17-BIH- TRA WB17-BIH- TRA WB17-KOS- TRA-01 Abbreviated Name Flood protection in Drini and Buna River Sector Lead IFI Grant [ ] (revised) ENV EIB 4,000,000 Sewer Ulcinj ENV EIB 110,000 Sewer Plav ENV EIB 100,000 Water supply Plav ENV EIB 200,000 DWTP Plijes, Breznica and Bogisevac Prison (Institution for the Mentally ill Detainees) State maximum security prison ENV EIB 40,000 SOC CEB 332,800 SOC CEB 220,000 Social housing SOC CEB 260,000 Prison Bijelo Polje SOC CEB 462,740 Project manangement Corridor V Mostar South Project Management Corridor V Zenica I N9 road works supervision TRA EBRD 514,800 TRA EIB 960,960 TRA EIB 4,160,000 In summary, 12 grant (including the conditional WB17-BIH-ENV-01) applications are screened and assessed positively and will be submitted to 16 th WBIF SC meeting for approval. Approval of WB17-BIH-ENV-01 will be conditional on the adoption of a country wide environmental strategy before the SC otherwise the Application will be rejected but could be resubmitted in a future round as required. 3

4 Status update INV Rounds 0 & 1 and first analysis of INV Round 2 Projects DG NEAR (Wolfgang Schläger) updated participants on the progress in the implementation of the INV Rounds 00 and 01. The EU grant and leveraging numbers were presented showing the overall investment versus the EU grants in 2015 and projects were approved in Round 00 and 3 projects were approved in Round 01. A further four projects in BiH were subjected to an extraordinary screening effort in autumn 2016 and subsequently assessed positively but put on hold subject to the demonstrable progress in the implementation of the Connectivity Reform Measures (CRM). Progress of the eleven approved projects is by large satisfactory with the first instalments disbursed to IFIs from the EWBJF for two projects. Regarding the current INV Round 02, which was launched by written procedure No. WBIFWP:003_09/09/16, the submission deadline was 31 December applications were received (1 SOC, 3 ENV, 1 ENE, 6 TRA), for a total grant request of 215 million. The applications have been subject to some preliminary EU screening with the aim to present a long list of potential INV projects to the Trieste summit in July. Currently the total grant request exceeds the available funds, hence it will not be possible to approve all the proposed projects at the 17 th WBIF SC meeting in December The INV projects are shown in the table below. 4

5 Grant Code SRB-ENE-01 BIH-ENV-01 MNE-ENV-01 SRB-ENV-01 BIH-SOC-01 BIH-TRA-06 BIH-TRA-07 MKD-TRA-01 MKD-TRA-02 MKD-TRA-03 SRB-TRA-01 Project title Transbalkan Corridor Section III (Double OHL 400 kv Obrenovac Bajina Basta) and section IV (Double OHL 400 kv Bajina Basta Visegrad Pljevlja) Sector Lead IFI Grant requested [ M] Total Project costs [ M] Estimated Loan [ M] ENE KfW Water and sanitation in Republika Srpska ENV EIB Construction of Wastewater Treatment Plant in Podgorica ENV KfW Belgrade Waterworks and Sewerage Treatment of wastewater and sludge originating from the Water Treatment Plant Makiš ENV EBRD Construction of the Cultural and Sports Centre Mostar SOC CEB Corridor VC "Construction of Motorway section Tarcin-Konjic", Subsection 1: Tarcin-Ivan, PART I: Tarcin entrance to Tunnel Ivan Corridor VC "Construction of Motorway section Tarcin - Konjic", Subsection 1: Tarcin-Ivan, PART II Tunnel Ivan Construction of railway line Kumanovo Beljakovce- Kriva Palanka- Deve Bair, border with Republic of Bulgaria, Eastern part of rail Corridor VIII, - Construction works for the section Beljakovce Kriva Palanka (34km) Rehabilitation and widening of National road Kriva Palanka Border crossing Deve Bair, Republic of Bulgaria, part of Corridor VIII, - Construction works of rehabilitation and widening of National road Kriva Palanka Border crossing Deve Bair (13km) Construction of new motorway section Gostivar Kicevo, part of Corridor VIII, - Construction works of the first phase Gostivar Kicevo motorway, section from Bukojcani Kicevo (13km) TRA EIB TRA EBRD TRA EBRD TRA EBRD TRA EBRD Modernization of the single-track railway line Nis Dimitrovgrad Bulgarian border TRA EIB Total No

6 Day 2: Policy & Strategy Session Presentation draft Monitoring Report IFICO (Steven van der Touw) presented cumulative figures including Round 16 as well as the INV Co-financing Rounds, exclusive of all cancelled grants. The WBIF updated main facts and figures include: 2 INV and 16 TA Rounds; 221 grants; 600 million in grants; 5 billion in signed loans; 10 billion in estimated loans and 15 billion estimated investments. In addition, and following the dissemination of a Discussion Paper on Additional Analysis for the Monitoring Report / MIS Analytics ahead of 23rd PFG, the first of the proposed indicators on Leveraging was presented. This indicator was split into leveraging for signed loans, leveraging for signed and potential loans and leveraging per project. Participants are invited to comment on this additional analysis as well as the disseminated Discussion Paper with a view of finalising the methodology so that the analysis may be included in the MIS and future editions of the Monitoring Report. EBRD (Caroline Clarkson) reminded participants that MIS data entry needs to be consistent across IFIs in order to arrive at a solid base for a calculation on leverage. Germany (Sabrina Brabetz) recommended consistency on cancellations, the Monitoring Report shows data with cancellations in- and excluded. Austria (Leander Treppel) questioned if some qualitative reporting, in addition to the quantitative assessment, should be included; e.g. an indication from which moment can leveraging be seen as good. DG NEAR (Wolfgang Schläger) invited participants to comment on the Discussion Paper on Additional Analysis for the Monitoring Report by the end of June. Certain sections of the Monitoring Report show data with cancellations included, some others exclude cancellations. The Monitoring Report will be reviewed and perhaps this can be improved. Joint Fund Presentation (update) EBRD (Caroline Clarkson) presented the state of play of the EWBJF, highlighting the contributions to the EWBJF throughout the years and confirmed the availability of Funds of 12.8 million. Slovenia (Robert Rampre) announced that Slovenia will pledge 0.5 million to the Joint Fund at the next WBIF SC meeting. 6

7 GAF: Updates DG NEAR (Wolfgang Schläger) reviewed the progress of the (TA and INV) GAF and the guidelines, both are an integral part of the revised governance of WBIF, and as such adopted by the 15 th WBIF SC meeting in London (15/12/2016). The GAFs were, at the same time, programmed into the MIS and all applications are now done via the MIS. With the current rounds (TA Rd 17 and INV Rd 02) under way via the MIS, a few shortcomings, and therefore areas for improvements of the GAFs, were identified. These concern: (a) avoid duplication and misunderstanding (e.g. on fees); (b) support to the applicants; (c) improve quality of the applications; (d) improve assessment process efficiency; (e) ease of and additional formalities for the approval process. The WBIF Secretariat (Stine Andresen) then presented in more detail the proposed areas for improvement. Following this 23 rd PFG, a GAF revision proposal will be discussed with the key stakeholders concerned and circulated as a background paper, with a view of adoption of the amended GAF, Guidelines and assessment grids, at the next WBIF SC meeting. Bosnia and Herzegovina (Nermina Saracevic) enquired if the IFI fees are included now automatically in the GAF, and if 4% for TA is confirmed as a default fee given the provision in General Condition of up to 4%. Serbia (Petar Spasic) voiced concerns about the NIPACs ability to sign GAFs, since there will have been changes and amendments made to these GAFs, and those will need national clearance. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (Orhideja Kaljosevska) stated that the Macedonian line ministries also submit the original GAF since the MIS changes the structure of the GAF (difficulties copying pictures across, etc). EBRD (Caroline Clarkson) advised that the signatories to the GAF should be restricted to those needed as the proposal implies a total of 4/5 signatures which is too many and could lead to a delay in the disbursement of funds from the EWBJF to the Lead IFI. DG NEAR (Wolfgang Schläger and Barbara Banki) clarified that the IFI fees are to be considered in addition to the grant amount needed for the TA or INV request, meaning that they are an eligible budget line of the WBIF grant and confirmed that an explanatory note will be circulated ahead of the next WBIF SC meeting. Regarding the signature of the GAFs, there will be further discussion and reflection on requirements. The amended GAF and Guidelines will be sent out ahead of the next WBIF SC meeting for comments. Vademecum (Presentation and Discussion) DG NEAR (Barbara Banki) reviewed the progress of the Vademecum, which was first presented at the 22 nd PFG in Pristina and then disseminated as a background paper for 7

8 the 15 th WBIF SC meeting in London, where participants requested additional time for comments. By the end of February 2017, over 2000 comments, additions, deletions, etc. were received. The Commission (COM) then decided to completely restructure and rewrite the Vademecum and some IFIs contributed as well. The redrafted Vademecum was sent out as a background paper for this 23 rd PFG. The Vademecum is intended to be a step by step guide to the WBIF. It does not constitute a legal document, nor does it attempt to establish any additional rules over and above those stipulated in the revised governance documents adopted by the SC (and which are annexed to the Vademecum). This means that the main body of the text can be updated from time to time if and when working practices change. As it stands, the Vademecum has 3 Chapters and 6 Annexes. Chapter 1 provides the overview of the WBIF, Chapter 2 deals with the Project Selection and Chapter 3 with the Implementation phase. The Vademecum is not intended to be a public document and will thus be available (and updated) in the MIS (and not on the website). The final version of the Vademecum will be circulated to the WBIF SC for information whilst Annex 5 of the Vademecum, which deals with the Amendments to the GAF, will require the approval of the WBIF SC. Comments on the latest disseminated version of the Vademecum are to be received by close of business on2 June. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (Suzana Peneva) requested clarification as to the timeline presented in section with a view of speeding up the drafting and implementation of ToR. Bosnia and Herzegovina (Sabina Dizdarevic) enquired if the issue of retro-active financing can be addressed in the Vademecum. Serbia (Petar Spasic) recommended certain (detailed) information to be reviewed, for example where defect notification periods are mentioned. Germany (Sabrina Brabetz) enquired if a list of abbreviations and a list of terms (definitions) will be added and if the Vademecum could be split into 2 parts (1) text and (2) Annexes. DG NEAR (Barbara Banki) clarified that the Vademecum is not the place to restructure or review the ToR process, but examples can be shown, where retro-active financing was possible, abbreviations and a quick reference guide will be added. IFI Cooperation in ENV and SOC Sectors The PFG Co-Chair CEB (Vitomir Miles Raguz) presented a New Point of Departure for SOC and ENV projects, by reviewing all WBIF grant applications in these two sectors, showing a drop in applications during the years of economic crisis and an increase in the last round. Following the times of change in WBIF (founding documents and the restrictive allocation of IPA regional funds to connectivity relevant INV projects), the ENV 8

9 and SOC sector rebounded in the last two rounds, with a healthy amount of ENV and SOC projects, both for TA and INV. INV projects in the ENV and SOC sector are subject to screening according to EU approximation and IFI assessment in much the same way as the other sectors. This includes: (1) mandatory adoption of a national sector strategy, (2) inclusion in the SPP, (3) maturity of projects, (4) realistic and timely grant demands, and (5) good quality GAFs. Additionally, eligible grant requests in SOC and ENV may be approved in June/December WBIF SC subject to the availability of bilateral donor funds. By contrast, INV requests in ENE and TRA which mobilise EU funds are approved once a year usually in December following the political Summit, IPA Committee and adoption of the related EU Financing Decision. Following this presentation, the PFG Co-Chair CEB enquired if and to which extent a similar GAP analysis, as was conducted in the ENE and TRA sectors, could be done for the ENV and SOC sectors. EIB (Maria Eleni Petrakou) enquired how the regional aspects of SOC and ENV projects can be demonstrated. Kosovo (Lum Mitta) enquired about the limitations of funding available for ENV and SOC sector projects. The PFG Co-Chair CEB (Vitomir Miles Raguz) explained that the regional dimension for SOC and ENV can be demonstrated by be spill over and knock on effects. In any case, the regional aspect for ENV and SOC projects is, while preferable, not a requirement. Regarding funds, there is a de-facto ceiling on the funds, until such time the COM decides to also allocate regional IPA funds for ENV and SOC INV co-financing. DG NEAR (Wolfgang Schläger) confirmed that the regional aspect is desired, but not a requirement under WBIF for ENV and SOC applications. For the foreseeable future, it is unlikely that regional IPA funds will be allocated for INV grants in the ENV and SOC sectors. Presentation of Bilateral Donors priorities The WBIF SC Co-chair Sweden (Magdalena Svensson) reassured participants of the Bilateral Donors (BD) s renewed and consistent interest and commitment to the WBIF, which is evidenced by the increased pledges of the last year. With the revised governance structure and procedures now largely in place, the BDs are strengthening their ties with the beneficiary countries. The BD s are now participating as observers in the Paris Group (PG) meetings and the BD community is pleased to see a healthy spread of applications, in particular those in the ENV and SOC sectors. The BDs particularly welcome the opportunity to further discuss the potential for INV grant co-financing of the projects submitted in INV Round 2. In addition, the BDs appreciate the increased focus on the 9

10 efficient implementation of grants and projects, the overview of the Capacity Building efforts, the additional sector analysis and look forward to hear more about the Infrastructure Project Facility (IPF) TA review. Biomass Sector Development update on findings The World Bank Group, (Jari Vayrynen) presented an update on the Biomass Sector Development Study, the final report will be available in the near future. The objective of the study is to identify viable investment options and policy measures to increase the use of biomass for heating in the region in a sustainable manner. Following the overview of Biomass use in the WBs, technologies were introduced and an economic and financial analysis was carried out, resulting in the identification of barriers. Barriers are of (a) technical, (b) financial, (c) policy and regulatory, (d) institutional and (e) market related nature. The study then proposes a Road Map of recommended actions and priority investments and recommended (i) changes to the Biomass supply (e.g. switch to forest residues), (ii) address the in-efficiencies in the local Biomass technologies, (iii) identify economic investment opportunities on the demand side, (iv) coupling of TA with investments to remove barriers, and (v) implementation of a long term road map of actions, starting with the improvement of framework conditions and awareness raising. KfW (Bodo Schmülling) announced that KfW is in the final steps to finance a Biomass project in Serbia. Bosnia and Herzegovina (Nermina Saracevic) enquired if a regional stakeholder consultation was planned, disseminating the findings of this study. The WBG (Jari Vayrynen) confirmed that regional events are planned for September A Regional Strategy for Sustainable Hydropower in the Western Balkans Progress of the Study and KFW's proposal DG NEAR (Elodie Loppé) stated that the COM tasked IPF 3 with the Hydropower study with the view of finding a more integrated and regional approach for Hydropower in the WBs and thus assisting the WB beneficiaries in meeting their 2020 Energy Efficiency targets. The objectives of this study were to develop this energy generation source, in a sustainable manner whilst respecting the EU environmental standards, based on the Water Framework Directive requirements for river basin management. Since almost all rivers cross borders, the regional dimension of this study was vital. Following an initial scoping exercise, the study was carried out and renamed as the Strategy for Hydropower, 2 workshops took place, in Podgorica, March and in Tirana, May following which some key findings were: (a) the importance of the transboundary dimension of hydropower, (b) appreciation of bio-diversity hot spots and unique aspects, like white rivers ; (c) rehabilitation of existing infrastructure is a viable option, (d) Environmental and Social Impact Assessments need to be carried out at the site and at 10

11 the river basin level, (e) the transmission grid can absorb the (to be) generated hydropower, (f) the need of a master plan. For the Trieste summit, environmental guidelines will be presented, covering the requirements of Art 47 of the Water Framework Directive, addressing the transboundary issues and presenting a strategy for green and brown field development. IPF 3 (Gordon Lamond) mentioned the hostility experienced by some participants at the hydropower conference in Tirana. This might have been due to some misunderstanding as the study initially looked at 418 potential Hydropower projects which was narrowed down to 130 potentially promising projects, 54 of which will be subject to further assessment. Some participants saw this list as a done deal which is far from reality. KfW (Jürgen Kern) presented the KfW proposal Promoting Hydro Power Development in the Western Balkan An alternative approach. Key findings are that there were no large scale Hydropower (HP) projects in the past decades; since 1985, the development of cumulative HP capacity at the WBs is almost flat. This is due to relatively high development costs compared to other sources of power generation. KfW proposed an alternative approach to the development of HP, by anchoring the (private) Investor and the project developer. So-called Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) could be established, each catering for 1 3 HP projects. The advantages are manifold, financially sound SPVs would alleviate the fiscal burden for the state budgets, state of the art technologies would be used, promotion and safe-guarding of EU standards, and finally, bankable HP projects would see a risk reduction due to the anchor-investor combination. The next steps would be to prioritize and bundle 1 3 HP projects, the selection of a number of suitable HP developers and the identification of a suitable legal and financial structure, followed by an overall commitment of the WB6 countries via conclusion of MoUs. Serbia (Petar Spasic) enquired about the nature of the SPV, and if state guarantees are required in this structure. Bosnia and Herzegovina (Nermina Saracevic) enquired if this structure was tested elsewhere. DG NEAR (Davor Kunc) enquired if KfW could see a role for WBIF in the promotion and further development of this alternative approach. The WBG (Alexander Rowland) mentioned that the WBG promotes an integrated approach for water management and thus HP and recommended liaison with the IFC, who are experienced in the establishment of such structures and SPVs. KfW (Bodo Schmülling and Jürgen Kern) confirmed that there are examples where this anchor model works, for example in North Africa. Sovereign guarantees per se are not required, unless the state is asked / required to provide parts of the capital expenditure. The nature of the SPV will depend on the jurisdiction where it is established. DG NEAR (Elodie Loppé) proposed to look into the KfW proposal and to discuss this further with the beneficiaries. 11

12 WBIF Update: NIC & SPP progression and Capacity Building activities in the Western Balkans IFICO (Falko Josef Sellner) presented the findings of the Capacity Building exercise. Charged by the 22 nd PFG, IFICO reviewed the Capacity Building efforts conducted under the WBIF and presented some data from selected EUDs. Capacity Building (CB) was defined as any planned training type activity, where either an agenda was drafted or where a follow up record was produced, this way capturing the traditional workshops, trainings, seminars, etc. and also the training on the job activities. The outcome shows that 211 CB events were organised directly under WBIF, of which 181 were workshops or seminars and 9 regional conferences and 6 study tours. In addition, the EUDs provided also CB events. With regard to the National Investment Committee (NIC) transposition and the advancement of the SPPs, a status update per country was presented, together with the current assistance IFICO provides. To this end, IFICO has drafted a methodology for Stakeholder Engagement and guidelines for Regional NIC Cooperation, which are currently under review by the COM. IFICO will also present a Compendium, explaining the various tools provided and how those interact. Some beneficiaries have or are engaging TA to support the further advancement of the NIC framework. Current efforts concentrate on sector advancement within the NIC framework and the inclusion of the NIC framework into the national budgeting system. Serbia (Petar Spasic) offered Serbian support for the inclusion of the Single Project Pipeline (SPP) into the national budgeting framework, which in itself will be a challenge. The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (Orhideja Kaljosevska) enquired if the presented numbers for the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia were correct. Bosnia and Herzegovina (Nermina Saracevic) also raised doubts about the accuracy of the data provided for Bosnia and Herzegovina and questioned relevance of the presented IPA TA support to the specific capacity needs of the NIPACs under WBIF. Montenegro (Bojan Vojovic) mentioned that also in Montenegro TA is being commissioned for the assistance with the NIC/SPP. DG NEAR (Wolfgang Schläger) offered to review the controversial Capacity Building numbers and reminded the participants that this was an overview and not a detailed review. MIS Reporting Module 12

13 The WBIF Secretariat (Stine Andresen) presented the latest update on the MIS and confirmed it has now been almost completely upgraded in terms of basic functionality. The new pre-submission interface was presented together with the new ToR workflow, both of which will facilitate monitoring of ToR development at any given stage. Further work is underway for the reporting module, which is partly complete and will consist of 5 parts: o Part 1: annual implementation report of Lead IFI (complete); o Part 2: IPF reporting (under completion); o Part 3: statistics on WBIF, based on MIS data, (ongoing); o Part 4: ToR development (complete); o Part 5: Written procedure via MIS (to be done); The MIS also interacts with the website and some selected data in the MIS will be shown on the public WBIF website; thus an element of care and consideration is recommended when updating the MIS, since mistakes in the MIS might be published automatically on the website. WBIF visibility update The WBIF Secretariat (Stine Andresen) presented the latest visibility products, such as the Annual Report In addition, a snapshot was shown of the new WBIF at a glance Flyer and the new four sector flyers. The website has also seen some improvement, with the page to pdf function now embedded in the website and the contents are being updated regularly (partly automatically, to the extent statistics are concerned, these are fed directly from the MIS). The website statistics show a steady increase of genuine (visitor type) hits. A major visibility event was successfully organised in the presence of CMR Hahn, this was the first 2015 Connectivity Agenda project (Svilaj bridge). These visibility events are important tools to convey the work of the WBIF and DG NEAR to the wider public, more such events will be organised in the near future. The WBIF Connectivity Project Tracker (slide No. 5) shows the projects progress and the potential dates and locations for visibility events. The organisation and planning of these events will be done by using the (draft) Communication and Visibility plan, which has been drawn up following the IFI visits earlier this year. Preparation of the 16th SC: succinct discussion The WBIF Secretariat (Stine Andresen) presented the highlights of the draft agenda for the WBIF SC meeting in Stockholm. The SC meeting will commence on the 14 th June in the early afternoon, at the SIDA premises with the Project Oriented Session, followed by the evening event. The second day (15 th June) is the Policy and Strategy session, where a 13

14 strategic discussion will be held, together with the EDIF participants on Private Sector Development and SME. The EDIF event is on the 16 th of June. AOB Germany (Klaus Wiedey) confirmed that Germany will pledge sufficient funds this year, thus meeting the criteria for KfW to become a full partner IFI in WBIF and the 17 th WBIF SC meeting will be held in Frankfurt, Germany. End of MoM. 14