# C_2006115EN.01007301.xml

| 16.5.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 115/73 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/73

---

Resolution on the way forward for the financial perspectives 2007-2013

(2006/C 115/16)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

HAVING REGARD TO its opinion on the financial perspective: Communication on Building Our Common Future: Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means of the Enlarged Union 2007-2013 (CdR 162/2004 fin);

HAVING REGARD TO the European Parliament resolution on Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means of the enlarged Union 2007-2013 (A6-0153/2005);

| 1) | WHEREAS the European Council failed to reach an agreement on the budget for the forthcoming EU programming period of 2007-2013 at its meeting on 16 and 17 June; |
| --- | --- |

1)

WHEREAS the European Council failed to reach an agreement on the budget for the forthcoming EU programming period of 2007-2013 at its meeting on 16 and 17 June;

| 2) | WHEREAS the United Kingdom presidency was called upon to take forward discussions, drawing on the progress made, with a view to resolving all the issues necessary for achieving an agreement as soon as possible; |
| --- | --- |

2)

WHEREAS the United Kingdom presidency was called upon to take forward discussions, drawing on the progress made, with a view to resolving all the issues necessary for achieving an agreement as soon as possible;

| 3) | WHEREAS there is a need for financial perspectives to be adopted in 2005 allowing effective policies for solidarity, territorial cohesion and more growth and jobs in Europe from 2007 onwards; |
| --- | --- |

3)

WHEREAS there is a need for financial perspectives to be adopted in 2005 allowing effective policies for solidarity, territorial cohesion and more growth and jobs in Europe from 2007 onwards;

adopted the following resolution at its 62nd plenary session of 16 and 17 November 2005 (meeting of 17 November):

The Committee of the Regions

The Committee of the Regions

| 1. | reiterates its support for the original balanced proposals of the European Commission (CdR 162/2004 fin), calculated on the basis of realistic needs and adopted after extensive consultations with local and regional authorities over four-years, which it set out in its opinion and reaffirmed in the declaration adopted jointly with the European Parliament on 6 April 2005 and the Wroclaw Declaration on 20 May 2005; |
| --- | --- |

1.

reiterates its support for the original balanced proposals of the European Commission (CdR 162/2004 fin), calculated on the basis of realistic needs and adopted after extensive consultations with local and regional authorities over four-years, which it set out in its opinion and reaffirmed in the declaration adopted jointly with the European Parliament on 6 April 2005 and the Wroclaw Declaration on 20 May 2005;

reiterates

| 2. | acknowledges the proposals made by the Luxembourg Presidency and agrees in particular with the European Parliament that the financial perspectives should be established in a way to ensure that sufficient resources are available to complement competitiveness and growth objectives and ensure the availability of Regional and Structural Funds for all European regions. This is indispensable if the Union is to deliver its commitments and avoid increased public disappointment with the European Union. Any reduction in the budget ceiling will put in danger the basic principles of cohesion policy and consequently undermine the principle of solidarity that represents a distinct and essential element of the European integration and the model of European society. Budget reductions in this area could result into a re-nationalisation of the regional policy for the majority of the former EU-15 and that is clearly contrary to the views of European regions and local authorities; |
| --- | --- |

2.

acknowledges the proposals made by the Luxembourg Presidency and agrees in particular with the European Parliament that the financial perspectives should be established in a way to ensure that sufficient resources are available to complement competitiveness and growth objectives and ensure the availability of Regional and Structural Funds for all European regions. This is indispensable if the Union is to deliver its commitments and avoid increased public disappointment with the European Union. Any reduction in the budget ceiling will put in danger the basic principles of cohesion policy and consequently undermine the principle of solidarity that represents a distinct and essential element of the European integration and the model of European society. Budget reductions in this area could result into a re-nationalisation of the regional policy for the majority of the former EU-15 and that is clearly contrary to the views of European regions and local authorities;

acknowledges

agrees

| 3. | underlines the convergence of views between the CoR and the European Parliament stressing the importance of EP's role as an equal partner in the budget negotiations; |
| --- | --- |

3.

underlines the convergence of views between the CoR and the European Parliament stressing the importance of EP's role as an equal partner in the budget negotiations;

underlines

| 4. | urges Member States to resist calls for restricting the Union's budget, and proposes that Member States provide the EU with a budget which allows it to act effectively in those areas where it has and can continue to provide tangible added value to the lives of Europe's citizens and the places they live and work. Notes that this will require strong leadership, demonstration of clear cross sector partnership and a sustained public discussion in the coming months to agree those key areas where the Union provides this added value; |
| --- | --- |

4.

urges Member States to resist calls for restricting the Union's budget, and proposes that Member States provide the EU with a budget which allows it to act effectively in those areas where it has and can continue to provide tangible added value to the lives of Europe's citizens and the places they live and work. Notes that this will require strong leadership, demonstration of clear cross sector partnership and a sustained public discussion in the coming months to agree those key areas where the Union provides this added value;

urges

proposes

Notes

| 5. | reminds Member States that cohesion policy is an area where the EU provides real added value: as spending in this area, at the EU level brings a greater return and leverage effect than at the national level. Cohesion policy has been proven to be particularly vital to fighting economic and social disparities between and within European regions, which constitute major obstacles to the delivery and efficiency of the European internal market. Cohesion policy is fundamental for regions that are lagging behind the average in Europe, to meet the Lisbon objectives and therefore has to be implicitly recognised as an essential complement in policy terms to all strategies for growth and jobs in Europe; |
| --- | --- |

5.

reminds Member States that cohesion policy is an area where the EU provides real added value: as spending in this area, at the EU level brings a greater return and leverage effect than at the national level. Cohesion policy has been proven to be particularly vital to fighting economic and social disparities between and within European regions, which constitute major obstacles to the delivery and efficiency of the European internal market. Cohesion policy is fundamental for regions that are lagging behind the average in Europe, to meet the Lisbon objectives and therefore has to be implicitly recognised as an essential complement in policy terms to all strategies for growth and jobs in Europe;

reminds

| 6. | supports the efforts made by the President of the European Commission to re-launch negotiations on the Financial Perspectives and considers that this could also help to take forward discussions on how to modernise the EU budget, but insists that all such proposals must be set within the minimum adequate financial framework. In this regard, it takes note of the proposals for a new Globalisation adjustment Fund and JEREMIE and JASPERS mechanisms, and considers that these instruments should be complementary and not introduced as alternatives to budget headings envisaged to deliver the convergence and the competitiveness and employment Objective; |
| --- | --- |

6.

supports the efforts made by the President of the European Commission to re-launch negotiations on the Financial Perspectives and considers that this could also help to take forward discussions on how to modernise the EU budget, but insists that all such proposals must be set within the minimum adequate financial framework. In this regard, it takes note of the proposals for a new Globalisation adjustment Fund and JEREMIE and JASPERS mechanisms, and considers that these instruments should be complementary and not introduced as alternatives to budget headings envisaged to deliver the convergence and the competitiveness and employment Objective;

supports

considers

insists

| 7. | furthermore, in this respect it warns against the channelling of EU funds into solely national policies to deliver competitiveness and growth considering that EU funds can be best targeted at to further develop territorial cohesion within a mainstreamed competitiveness and growth agenda as part of a EU wide Cohesion policy; moreover demands that the Structural Funds co-financing rules should continue to provide the possibility for private co-financing; |
| --- | --- |

7.

furthermore, in this respect it warns against the channelling of EU funds into solely national policies to deliver competitiveness and growth considering that EU funds can be best targeted at to further develop territorial cohesion within a mainstreamed competitiveness and growth agenda as part of a EU wide Cohesion policy; moreover demands that the Structural Funds co-financing rules should continue to provide the possibility for private co-financing;

warns against

| 8. | regrets that the informal summit in Hampton Court on 27 October could not achieve the restarting of the debate on the financial perspectives; |
| --- | --- |

8.

regrets that the informal summit in Hampton Court on 27 October could not achieve the restarting of the debate on the financial perspectives;

regrets

| 9. | is especially concerned that a delayed agreement will have a negative impact on how citizens view Europe, will jeopardise a smooth start to the next programming period, and generate financial instability across the local and regional authorities of the EU, with negative economic effects, above all in the new Member States, which could face serious problems in fulfilling obligations that originated during transition periods, which the Member States agreed to comply with in accession agreements before the last enlargement of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

9.

is especially concerned that a delayed agreement will have a negative impact on how citizens view Europe, will jeopardise a smooth start to the next programming period, and generate financial instability across the local and regional authorities of the EU, with negative economic effects, above all in the new Member States, which could face serious problems in fulfilling obligations that originated during transition periods, which the Member States agreed to comply with in accession agreements before the last enlargement of the European Union.

is especially concerned

| 10. | reiterates its appeal to the British Presidency to do all that is necessary to reach an agreement by the end of the year. |
| --- | --- |

10.

reiterates its appeal to the British Presidency to do all that is necessary to reach an agreement by the end of the year.

reiterates its appeal

Brussels, 17 November 2005.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Peter STRAUB

---