# C_2007057EN.01002701.xml

| 10.3.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 57/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 57/27

---

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Communication from the Commission The Growth and Jobs Strategy and the Reform of European cohesion policy Fourth progress report on cohesion

(2007/C 57/06)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

HAVING REGARD TO the Communication of the European Commission — Fourth progress report on cohesion — The Growth and Jobs Strategy and the Reform of the European cohesion policy — COM(2006) 281, SEC(2006) 726;

HAVING REGARD TO

Fourth progress report on cohesion

The Growth and Jobs Strategy and the Reform of the European cohesion policy

HAVING REGARD TO the decision of the European Commission of 17 May 2005, to consult it on this subject, under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

HAVING REGARD TO

HAVING REGARD TO the decision of its President of 23 June 2006 to instruct its Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy to draw up an opinion on this subject;

HAVING REGARD TO

HAVING REGARD TO its opinion on the Third Report on Economic and Social Cohesion (CdR 120/2004 fin);

HAVING REGARD TO

Third Report on Economic and Social Cohesion

HAVING REGARD TO the Conclusions of the informal Council of Ministers meeting on sustainable communities. Bristol, 6-7 December 2005;

HAVING REGARD TO

HAVING REGARD TO its Opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Building our Common Future: Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means of the Enlarged Union 2007-2013 — COM(2004) 101 final (CdR 162/2004 fin) (1);

HAVING REGARD TO

Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament: Building our Common Future: Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means of the Enlarged Union 2007-2013

1

HAVING REGARD TO its Opinion on the Proposal for a Council Regulation laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund COM(2004) 492 final — 2004/0163 (AVC) (CdR 232/2004 fin) (2);

HAVING REGARD TO

Proposal for a Council Regulation laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund

2

HAVING REGARD TO its Opinion on the Communication from the Commission Cohesion Policy in Support of Growth and Job Community Strategic Guidelines, 2007-2013 COM(2005) 299 final (CdR 40/2005 fin);

HAVING REGARD TO

Communication from the Commission Cohesion Policy in Support of Growth and Job Community Strategic Guidelines, 2007-2013

HAVING REGARD TO its Opinion on the Communication from the Commission Third progress report on cohesion: Towards a new partnership for growth, jobs and cohesion COM(2005) 192 final (CdR 141/2005 fin);

HAVING REGARD TO

Communication from the Commission Third progress report on cohesion: Towards a new partnership for growth, jobs and cohesion

HAVING REGARD TO its draft opinion (CdR 249/2006) adopted on 19 October 2006 ... by its Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy (rapporteur: Mr William John Williams (UEN-EA/UK), (Member of Isle of Anglesey County Council);

HAVING REGARD TO

: Mr William John Williams (UEN-EA/UK), (

WHEREAS regional policy is the reduction of regional disparities, as stated in Article 158 of the Treaty;

WHEREAS

adopted the following opinion at its 67th plenary session, held on 6-7 December 2006 (meeting of 6 December):

1.   Economic and social disparities in the enlarged EU

The Committee of the Regions

| 1.1 | notes that whilst growth rates have been slower across the EU during 2005, the presence of Convergence Programmes has been beneficial to those regions concerned in terms of leverage and additionality; |
| --- | --- |

1.1

notes that whilst growth rates have been slower across the EU during 2005, the presence of Convergence Programmes has been beneficial to those regions concerned in terms of leverage and additionality;

notes

| 1.2 | welcomes, therefore, the Communication's finding that the present level of disparities in the EU makes clear the need for a pan EU regional policy that promotes growth and reduces disparities across the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

1.2

welcomes, therefore, the Communication's finding that the present level of disparities in the EU makes clear the need for a pan EU regional policy that promotes growth and reduces disparities across the European Union;

welcomes

| 1.3 | stresses that Cohesion Policy plays a key role in all EU regions, given the importance that EU multi annual programming of the Structural Funds has in maintaining planned levels of public investment throughout periods of economic downturn in the Member States. In addition, EU funding provides a stable planning process, an external stimulus and leverage effects which are essential to sustainable regional development; |
| --- | --- |

1.3

stresses that Cohesion Policy plays a key role in all EU regions, given the importance that EU multi annual programming of the Structural Funds has in maintaining planned levels of public investment throughout periods of economic downturn in the Member States. In addition, EU funding provides a stable planning process, an external stimulus and leverage effects which are essential to sustainable regional development;

stresses

| 1.4 | welcomes the fact that the final regulations allow for private funding to co finance Structural Fund expenditure in order to avoid greater pressure on regional and local budgets. |
| --- | --- |

1.4

welcomes the fact that the final regulations allow for private funding to co finance Structural Fund expenditure in order to avoid greater pressure on regional and local budgets.

welcomes

2.   Recent developments in EU Cohesion Policy

The Committee of the Regions

| 2.1 | welcomes the European Commission's performance in terms of Budget Execution in 2005; |
| --- | --- |

2.1

welcomes the European Commission's performance in terms of Budget Execution in 2005;

welcomes

| 2.2 | supports the more strategic approach being taken by the European Commission through the Community Strategic Guidelines; |
| --- | --- |

2.2

supports the more strategic approach being taken by the European Commission through the Community Strategic Guidelines;

supports

| 2.3 | underlines that the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) and the elaboration of Operation Programmes should be guided by the partnership approach as defined in the General regulation on Structural Funds. The principle of partnership is essential for the efficiency and success of Cohesion Policy; |
| --- | --- |

2.3

underlines that the National Strategic Reference Framework (NSRF) and the elaboration of Operation Programmes should be guided by the partnership approach as defined in the General regulation on Structural Funds. The principle of partnership is essential for the efficiency and success of Cohesion Policy;

underlines

| 2.4 | reiterates the importance of both regional and local levels being associated in the elaboration of the National Strategic Reference Frameworks and Operational Programmes. This process should be guided by the good principles of ‘multi-level governance’ of Cohesion Policy, involving local and regional authorities as well as economic and social actors; |
| --- | --- |

2.4

reiterates the importance of both regional and local levels being associated in the elaboration of the National Strategic Reference Frameworks and Operational Programmes. This process should be guided by the good principles of ‘multi-level governance’ of Cohesion Policy, involving local and regional authorities as well as economic and social actors;

reiterates

| 2.5 | believes that in order to tackle significant variations in growth rates between regions, the new ‘Territorial Cooperation’ Objective merits greater reference in the Report, given the added value that exchanging best practice between performing regions and those with lower growth rates can have for EU Cohesion Policy as a whole; |
| --- | --- |

2.5

believes that in order to tackle significant variations in growth rates between regions, the new ‘Territorial Cooperation’ Objective merits greater reference in the Report, given the added value that exchanging best practice between performing regions and those with lower growth rates can have for EU Cohesion Policy as a whole;

believes

| 2.6 | remains concerned that the target of 24 million new jobs needed for the EU to hit the 70 % Lisbon employment rate by 2010 will be unachievable unless Member States make significant efforts to achieve job related growth; |
| --- | --- |

2.6

remains concerned that the target of 24 million new jobs needed for the EU to hit the 70 % Lisbon employment rate by 2010 will be unachievable unless Member States make significant efforts to achieve job related growth;

remains

| 2.7 | acknowledges the need for Cohesion Policy to deliver increases in growth and employment through the ‘Earmarking Process’. The Cur welcomes the final inclusive list which will allow a wider range of basic actions like transport, telecoms, social inclusion relevant to local and regional authorities whose primary concern is to reduce regional disparities; |
| --- | --- |

2.7

acknowledges the need for Cohesion Policy to deliver increases in growth and employment through the ‘Earmarking Process’. The Cur welcomes the final inclusive list which will allow a wider range of basic actions like transport, telecoms, social inclusion relevant to local and regional authorities whose primary concern is to reduce regional disparities;

acknowledges

| 2.8 | notes that the earmarking process will entail substantial changes for all regions across the EU-15 where earmarking is obligatory. The earmarking process must therefore take into account the particular needs and situations arising in EU regions; |
| --- | --- |

2.8

notes that the earmarking process will entail substantial changes for all regions across the EU-15 where earmarking is obligatory. The earmarking process must therefore take into account the particular needs and situations arising in EU regions;

notes

| 2.9 | considers that Growth and Jobs strategies supported by the Structural Funds clearly need to be designed with greater input from local and regional authorities. The successful preparation of National Reform Programmes and the new generation of Cohesion Policy programmes for 2007-2013 strongly depends on the quality of coordination between Member States and the local and regional level; |
| --- | --- |

2.9

considers that Growth and Jobs strategies supported by the Structural Funds clearly need to be designed with greater input from local and regional authorities. The successful preparation of National Reform Programmes and the new generation of Cohesion Policy programmes for 2007-2013 strongly depends on the quality of coordination between Member States and the local and regional level;

considers

| 2.10 | underlines the policy set out in the Lisbon Annual Progress Report (APR) to develop stronger and systematic coordination mechanisms between those responsible for the National Reform Programmes and those preparing the Cohesion Policy programmes 2007-2013; |
| --- | --- |

2.10

underlines the policy set out in the Lisbon Annual Progress Report (APR) to develop stronger and systematic coordination mechanisms between those responsible for the National Reform Programmes and those preparing the Cohesion Policy programmes 2007-2013;

underlines

| 2.11 | underlines the important contribution that local and regional authorities can make to the Lisbon process through their education and skills agendas given the importance of increasing skill levels as part of economic development; |
| --- | --- |

2.11

underlines the important contribution that local and regional authorities can make to the Lisbon process through their education and skills agendas given the importance of increasing skill levels as part of economic development;

underlines

| 2.12 | is conscious of the benefits that the alignment of EU regional funding with domestic funds can have in terms of leverage and efficiency, but urges the European Commission to be vigilant, notwithstanding the new definition of additionality, to ensure that Structural Funds remain clearly visible at local and regional level; |
| --- | --- |

2.12

is conscious of the benefits that the alignment of EU regional funding with domestic funds can have in terms of leverage and efficiency, but urges the European Commission to be vigilant, notwithstanding the new definition of additionality, to ensure that Structural Funds remain clearly visible at local and regional level;

is conscious

| 2.13 | welcomes the initiative taken by the European Commission in conjunction with the EIB in favour of innovation and sustainability in regional policy including more innovative forms of financial engineering in the regions such as JESSICA (Joint European Support for Sustainable Investment in City Areas) and JEREMIE (support for Sees in the area of financial engineering); |
| --- | --- |

2.13

welcomes the initiative taken by the European Commission in conjunction with the EIB in favour of innovation and sustainability in regional policy including more innovative forms of financial engineering in the regions such as JESSICA (Joint European Support for Sustainable Investment in City Areas) and JEREMIE (support for Sees in the area of financial engineering);

welcomes

| 2.14 | urges that local and regional authorities, together with the European Commission identify and target needs for additional capacity building at the local and regional level taking account of progress made in previous programmes; |
| --- | --- |

2.14

urges that local and regional authorities, together with the European Commission identify and target needs for additional capacity building at the local and regional level taking account of progress made in previous programmes;

urges

| 2.15 | underlines the essential interrelationship that exists between urban and rural areas across the European Union and is concerned by the continuing lack of synergy and demarcation between the emerging Structural, Rural Development and Fisheries programmes for the 2007-13 period; |
| --- | --- |

2.15

underlines the essential interrelationship that exists between urban and rural areas across the European Union and is concerned by the continuing lack of synergy and demarcation between the emerging Structural, Rural Development and Fisheries programmes for the 2007-13 period;

underlines

| 2.16 | looks forward, as the representative body of local and regional governments, to a productive dialogue with the European Commission on the Fourth Cohesion Report, expected in spring 2007. |
| --- | --- |

2.16

looks forward, as the representative body of local and regional governments, to a productive dialogue with the European Commission on the Fourth Cohesion Report, expected in spring 2007.

looks

Brussels, 6 December 2006.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Michel DELEBARRE

---

(1)  OJ C 164 of 5.7.2005, p. 4.

1

(2)  OJ C 231 of 20.9.2005, p. 1.

2

---