Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on 'The Allocation of the Reserve for Community Initiatives for the period until 1999` (96/C 337/01)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the decision of Commissioner Wulf-Mathies, dated 31 October 1995, to consult the Committee of the Regions, according to Article 198C, paragraph 1 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the Commission's proposals to allocate the reserve for Community Initiatives for the period until 1999;

Having regard to its decision of 15 November 1995 to refer the preparation of the Opinion to Commission 1 'Regional Development, Economic Development, Local and Regional Finances`;

Having regard to the Draft Opinion (CdR 74/96 rev.) adopted by Commission 1 on 21 March 1996 (Rapporteur: Betty Coffey);

Considering the Commission's Green Paper of 16 June 1993, on the Community Initiatives (COM(93) 282 final);

Considering the Commission's proposals on the Future of Community Initiatives under the Structural Funds (COM(94) 46 final) and to the Committee of the Regions' Opinion on the Future of Community Initiatives under the Structural Funds ();

Considering the Committee of the Regions' Opinions on Urban Development and the European Union (); Structural Funds Innovatory Measures 1995-1999 - Guidelines for the Second Series of Actions under Article 10 of the ERDF Regulations (); the Draft Notice from the Commission to the Member States, laying down guidelines for Operational Programmes which Member States are invited to establish in the framework of a Community Initiative concerning urban areas (Urban) (); Measures to combat the socio-economic and environmental impact of drought in southern Europe (),

at its Plenary Session on 12 and 13 June 1996 (session of 12 June) adopted the following Opinion by a unanimous vote.

1. Introduction

1.1. The Community Initiatives are special instruments of structural policy which the Commission proposes, to support measures which will counteract particular problems impacting at a European level. Under Article 130a of the EC Treaty the Community aims to reduce the disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured regions. Features of the Community Initiatives are:

- the support for the development of transnational, cross border and inter-regional co-operation;

- the 'bottom-up` method of implementation;

- the high profile they give, at local and regional level to Community assistance.

1.2. These features lend added value, as compared with the other measures financed by the Structural Funds, to Community measures.

1.3. In December 1992, the European Council at its meeting in Edinburgh provided more funds for structural action and specified that the allocation for Community Initiatives should amount to 5-10 % of the total resources committed under the Structural Funds. The General Affairs Council decided at its meeting on 6 July 1993, to set aside ECU 13,45 billion (1992 prices), or 9 % of the Structural Fund budget for Community Initiatives from 1994 to 1999.

1.4. In June 1993, the Commission presented its Green Paper (COM(93) 282 final), on the future of Community Initiatives and proposed to re-group the Community Initiatives around five major priorities:

- cross border, transnational and inter-regional co-operation and networks;

- rural development;

- the most remote regions;

- employment and the development of human resources;

- the management of industrial change.

1.5. This document was discussed at the informal Council of Ministers responsible for regional policy and planning and following consultation with the European Parliament, the Economic and Social Committee, the Consultative Council of Regional and Local Authorities and the economic and social partners it was decided to add to the five original priorities:

- the development of crisis-hit urban areas;

- the restructuring of the fishing industry.

1.6. It should be noted that the Committee of the Regions was not established at this time and was therefore unable to deliver an Opinion on the Green Paper, within the framework of the consultation procedure chosen by the Commission.

1.7. In February 1994, the Commission presented its guidelines for the 13 Community Initiatives for the period 1994-1999 and these were adopted in June 1994. Thus far a total of ECU 11,85 billion has been allocated to the 13 Community Initiatives, with a reserve of ECU 1,6 billion (about 12 % of the total available), to be allocated over the period 1994-1999, in light of experience gained from implementation, new developments and the financial balance among the Member States.

1.8. On 4 October 1995, the Commission adopted a proposal in relation to the allocation of the reserve for Community Initiatives for the period up to the end of 1999. This proposed the allocation of a reserve of ECU 1,665 billion, following modifications to the Portuguese textile programme and the financing of the Peace Initiative for Ireland.

The Committee of the Regions

2. General Comments

2.1. underlines the positive effects of its consultations held with the Commission with regard to structural policy and the Community Initiatives, in the past;

2.2. regrets that the European Commission has already allocated the reserve without waiting for the Committee to deliver its Opinion and without evaluation of the Initiative's effects on regions and local communities and the submission of regular reports to the Committee (CdR 27/94);

2.3. recognizes however, the need to allocate the reserve for Community Initiatives quickly given the time delay between the inception and implementation of programmes;

2.4. would expect that, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, the Committee of the Regions will be consulted and involved in future policy decision making with regard to structural policy and the Community Initiatives;

2.5. would welcome a proper mid-term evaluation of the implementation of the Community Initiatives, to inform on progress and their impact on regional and local areas, experience gained and the existence of new and emerging developments;

2.6. will continue to adopt a proactive role in discussion with the Commission in its approach to the implementation of the Community Initiatives;

3. Specific comments

3.1. Community Initiatives

3.1.1. gives its approval to the areas proposed by the Commission for additional assistance, which maintain continuity of the Community Initiatives and take into consideration many of the requirements highlighted by the Committee;

3.1.2. welcomes the reinforcing of the Community Initiative's priorities on employment, innovation and partnership and transnational co-operation;

3.1.3. welcomes the priority status given to actions which favour equal opportunities in general in the Initiatives;

3.1.4. considers however, that the reserve budget may prove to be inadequate to provide for the measures under the Community Initiatives to the end of 1999, given the proposed extension of the Industrial Change Initiatives and the creation of new strands under existing Initiatives;

3.1.5. notes that, based on the figures it has at present, the proportion of the reserve allocation to Objective 1 and 6 regions is considerably less than that proposed in the Commission's document: The Future of Community Initiatives under the Structural Funds (COM(94) 46 final). It would urge therefore that the Commission would address this. Objective 1 regions should receive at least ECU 8,16 billion of the ECU 13,467 billion which are devoted to Community Initiatives in accordance with the 1992 Edinburgh Council and Article 12.2 of the Framework Regulation (2081/93);

3.1.6. stresses the need for greater synergy between the Community Initiatives and welcomes the Commission's efforts to provide for better integration between the funds and the use of resources;

3.1.7. highlights the importance of developing existing Community Initiatives and using financing under Article 10 of the ERDF Regulations as a model for new areas of support and calls for greater efforts to be made to ensure the complementarity of funding under Article 10 and the Community Initiatives. A clear distinction should be made between the support objectives of the Community Initiatives and measures under Article 10 of the ERDF Regulations to prevent any danger of duplication of aid;

3.1.8. emphasizes the Community Initiative's benefit for regions and local areas and in application of the subsidiarity principle, would again demand that the framing of regional operational programmes and practical rules and procedures must be the preserve of regional and local bodies. At present, this is not the case in all Member States;

3.1.9. would therefore welcome the strengthening of the bottom-up approach of the Community Initiatives, in accordance with the partnership principle, through regional operational programmes;

3.1.10. opposes the creation of additional administrative structures to allocate the reserve and supports the proposal to minimize the administrative burden on national administrations and regions implementing the additional allocations;

3.1.11. welcomes the Commission's efforts to avoid burdensome regulatory procedures, by modifying existing operational programmes, thus avoiding an increase in the number of programmes being implemented;

3.1.12. underlies the Initiatives' supporting role of the Structural Funds and calls on priority to be given to Objective 1 and 6 regions and those areas which are experiencing the effects of peripherality within the European Union. Furthermore, the COR calls on priority to be given, wherever possible, to areas identified as eligible for assistance under Objectives 1, 2, 5b and 6, while, in the case of Initiatives targeted on vulnerable groups (e.g. the disabled, long-term unemployed, etc.) not discriminating against projects aimed at individuals within such groups;

3.1.13. welcomes the principle of flexibility to allow for the allocation of the reserve to be concentrated on a more limited number of initiatives, provided this does not lead to a modification of the split between Objectives 1 and 6 and other Objectives;

3.1.14. would like to add that modifications to existing operational programmes should also highlight the contribution the new allocations can make to inter regional co-operation, as well as, to the solution of the employment problem, the provision of equal opportunities, the protection of the environment, the promotion of SMEs and the development of the Information Society;

3.1.15. calls for the procedure for adopting the regulations and operational programmes of Initiatives such as Urban and Interreg IIC to be speeded up so that funds can be disbursed without delay;

3.1.16. calls on the Commission and on the Member States' representatives on the 'Community Initiatives` management committee to take account of regional and local interests in their decision taking in accordance with the Committee of the Regions' Opinion ();

3.1.17. calls on the Commission to adopt uniform criteria for assessing the quality of each Initiative's operational programme, with particular regard to the level and nature of partnership and subsidiarity incorporated in administrative procedures. There is a clear role for the Committee of the Regions in deciding these criteria;

3.2. Industrial Change

3.2.1. gives its express approval to the extension of the four programmes aimed at the industrial reconversion of regions beyond 1997, up to the end of 1999 on the understanding that industrial areas are given sufficient opportunity to tackle serious environmental pollution and infrastructure imbalance. However, the COR feels that the financial allocations to the initiatives are insufficient to have the desired effect in terms of economic regeneration and considers that unspent funds from the 1994-1997 period must be added to the budget for Industrial Initiatives;

3.2.2. supports the priority status given to this field of intervention and recognizes the contribution these Initiatives have made to the creation of alternative employment;

3.2.3. notes the proposal to permit the flexible implementation of the allocations envisaged for each Initiative but expresses concern that this would allow Member States to switch allocations between initiatives. The COR feels that the European Commission should retain the right to set these allocations after consultation with Member States, the European Parliament and the COR. It would however welcome a greater level of involvement by regional and local authorities in assessing local needs and determining priority areas of action;

3.3. Rural Development

3.3.1. supports the additional allocation to Leader II and hopes that the strong expectations of the Programme, held by the local actors in rural development are realized;

3.3.2. recognizes that many of the needs for rural development cannot be satisfied by available Community funds and Leader II represents an important mechanism for the continued support of rural development activity;

3.3.3. feels that emphasis needs to be placed, particularly in connection with Leader II, on a 'bottom-up` approach involving maximum decentralization in the organization and implementation of intervention and the greatest possible involvement of local and regional authorities;

3.4. Pesca

3.4.1. endorses the continued support for this Initiative, given the worsening situation of the fisheries sector;

3.4.2. urges that priority under the Pesca Initiative would be given to areas which are highly dependent on the fishing industry;

3.4.3. welcomes the increased emphasis of the programme on management and monitoring of fisheries activities, given the increasing need to conserve and protect fish stocks and ensure compliance with EU Regulations in the sector;

3.4.4. stresses that the Pesca Initiative is not a narrow sectoral programme but a broad regional policy instrument; hence local and regional authorities should play a key role in organizing and implementing intervention, in liaison with fishery industry organizations in particular; it is recommended that these regions, which are highly dependent on fisheries, benefit from the same bottom-up approach through regional programmes as it is the case in the Community Initiative Leader II.

3.5. Employment and Adapt

3.5.1. welcomes the Commission's proposal to establish a separate initiative to exclusively target social exclusion and combat racism and xenophobia and appreciates the need to discontinue these measures under the Employment-Horizon Initiative. The COR regrets, however, that the blockage by some Member States of the European Commission's proposal to introduce a new Programme against Social Exclusion ('Poverty IV`) has lead to a damaging hiatus in Union action to combat the scourge of social exclusion and believes, therefore, that the proposal to introduce a separate, though small, Initiative to target social exclusion and combat racism and xenophobia is a necessary attempt to ensure some Union finance in these crucial areas;

3.5.2. supports therefore, the rationalization of the Employment-Horizon Initiative to deal exclusively with the handicapped;

3.5.3. doubts whether the allocation of ECU 200 million is sufficient as the EU's sole instrument directed specifically against social exclusion and racism and xenophobia;

3.5.4. is greatly concerned at the lack of coherence between national administrations in the handling of applications under the Employment and Adapt Initiatives, which is resulting in confusion, delay and disenchantment on the part of applicants. The COR believes that the Commission must examine as a matter of urgency how this situation can be improved;

3.5.5. welcomes the extension of Adapt to promote employment growth in the information society, but is concerned about the take-up of Adapt in a number of Member States. The COR points out, however, that measures under the new initiative can already qualify for support under the existing programme, giving rise to fears of duplication of aid. This has to be taken into consideration when using Adapt-BIS. The COR fears that the procedures governing the Adapt programme will result in underspending and therefore asks the Commission and the Member States to revise the procedures so that each transnational project has to be approved only once and the requisite attention is given once again to the Commission's key role in connection with the Community Initiatives. The COR calls for a modified management structure in which the regions take over the programme management, for the purpose of introducing an integrated approach at regional level instead of encouraging project 'tourism`;

3.5.6. strongly advocates a stronger role for regional and local authorities in measures to combat the serious unemployment problems faced throughout the European Union;

3.5.7. endorses the continued assistance for measures to promote equal opportunities and combat youth unemployment;

3.6. Interreg C

3.6.1. notes the spatial planning measures and recognizes its importance for economic and social cohesion and the sustainable and balanced development of the Member States of the European Union. The COR notes that the Commission intends to get to grips with problems of spatial planning and international cooperation on the combatting of drought and flooding in the framework of the Interreg II C initiative. The Committee doubts however that, presently, any Community responsibility for spatial planning can be derived from primary Community law;

3.6.2. points out, however, that it is necessary not to spend heavily on consultancy work, which takes up funds earmarked for cooperation on specific spatial planning topics. Enough consultants' reports have been produced on cross-border cooperation. What is lacking are funds for investments on the basis of the particular operational programmes, which themselves are based on spatial planning reports;

3.6.3. calls on the Commission to provide for an equitable balance of funding for projects between contiguous and non-contiguous regions and ensure that regions with maritime borders and borders with third counties are not disadvantaged in the access to funds;

3.6.4. stresses that involvement in the spatial planning measure must adhere to the 'bottom-up` perspective, with local and regional authorities being the major partners, and must not work down from arbitrary and imposed blueprints which do not correspond to reality;

3.6.5. therefore, welcomes the spatial planning measure as it reinforces the central role of regional and local authorities in the implementation of the Community Initiatives;

3.6.6. urges that provision be made for a broad interpretation of 'spatial planning` to encompass inter-regional cooperation on, for instance, local and regional industrial development, thereby strengthening the link between structural policy instruments and action in a European planning perspective;

3.6.7. is concerned that the inter-regional nature of the measures to combat drought and flooding is undefined and has not been clearly justified, and would welcome the adoption of the guidelines for each strand of Interreg C without delay. The COR should, without prejudice to the future nature of the Interreg Initiative, seek a consultative role with the European Commission on the guidelines for Interreg II C. The COR emphasises the need to avoid additional administrative procedures for the implementation of the initiative;

3.7. Urban Policy

3.7.1. endorses the inclusion of issues such as equal opportunities, long-term unemployment and the urban environment, which can be addressed by the Urban Initiative;

3.7.2. welcomes the introduction of the Urban Initiative for smaller urban centres, with less than 100 000 inhabitants, which gives recognition to the role of these cities in economic development and of the capacity of their local and regional administrations to contribute to the creation of new employment opportunities;

3.7.3. welcomes the additional allocation, but cautions against the danger of spreading the effects of the funding, making it increasingly inadequate to the scale of need in urban areas;

3.7.4. calls therefore, for the funds to be limited to projects in cities which are experiencing the greatest level of deprivation;

3.7.5. hopes that the experience gained from the initiative will ensure the formation of a new urban policy when the Treaty on European Union is revised in 1996;

3.7.6. is concerned that further amendments to the Initiative's operational programme would delay its adoption and calls for the process to be finalized without delays.

4. Conclusion

4.1. The Committee of the Regions stresses the important role the Initiatives play in supporting the measures financed by the Structural Funds and would welcome a stronger role for the Committee in determining the nature of the Initiatives and their administrative procedures. The Committee would therefore call for a comprehensive evaluation of the current Community Initiatives and calls for the submission of regular reports to the Committee of the Regions.

4.2. The Committee of the Regions welcomes the allocation of the reserve for Community Initiatives at this stage in their implementation and broadly agrees with the priority areas supported. It is however concerned that prior consultation was not undertaken between it and the Commission on the allocation, given the central role for regional and local authorities in measures supported under the Community Initiatives.

Done at Brussels, 12 June 1996.

The Chairman of the Committee of the Regions

Pasqual MARAGALL i MIRA

() OJ No C 217, 6. 8. 1994, p. 5.

() OJ No C 100, 2. 4. 1996, p. 78.

() OJ No C 100, 2. 4. 1996, p. 124.

() OJ No C 217, 6. 8. 1994, p. 10.

() OJ No C 100, 2. 4. 1996, p. 45.

() OJ No C 217, 6. 8. 1994, p. 5.