Opinion of the Economic and Social Committee on the "Northern Dimension: Action plan for the Northern Dimension in the external and cross-border policies of the European Union 2000-2003"

(2001/C 139/11)

At its plenary session of 1 and 2 March 2000, the Economic and Social Committee, acting under Rule 23(3) of its Rules of Procedure, decided to draw up an additional opinion on the "Northern Dimension: Action plan for the Northern Dimension in the external and cross-border policies of the European Union 2000-2003".

The Section for External Relations, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 6 February 2001. The rapporteur was Mr Uno Westerlund.

At its 379th plenary session of 28 February and 1 March 2001 (meeting of 28 February 2001), the Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion unanimously.

1. Background

1.1. The EU's Northern Dimension and the Baltic Sea area

1.1.1. As a political concept, the "Northern Dimension" has been on the European Council's agenda since 1997. The Cologne European Council established the implementation guidelines in June 1999.

The initiative springs from the break-up of the Soviet Union; the fact that following German re-unification, the former GDR became part of the EU; Finland and Sweden became new EU Member States and have a tradition of close cooperation with Norway and Iceland; and the forthcoming enlargement includes Poland, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, thereby extending the EU's common border with Russia.

The Baltic States and Poland have all made significant progress in preparing for EU membership, and the EU has stressed the importance of relations with Russia in various ways, inter alia by adopting a specific Russia strategy.

The events of the last decade have thus lead the EU increasingly to consider problems and development opportunities from a northern perspective. This is of common interest to the European Union as a whole. Commissioner Chris Patten and the Swedish Foreign Minister Anna Lindh stress this in a joint article(1): "The Northern Dimension must be seen as an all-European commitment, just as much as the EU's policies towards the Mediterranean and the western Balkans". They also create expectations when they say "The Commission and the Swedish presidency must now guide the EU to move from words to action".

1.1.2. The Cologne European Council defined the EU's Northern Dimension as being the geographic area covered by the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS). These are the Nordic countries (Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland), Russia, the three Baltic States (Estonia, Lithuania and Latvia), Poland, Germany. The Northern Dimension initiative has therefore contributed towards the historically important Baltic Sea area's re-emergence as a regional entity in Europe. It has also drawn attention to the Barents Sea area and to the cooperation efforts in the most northerly part of Europe.

1.1.3. The Council of the Baltic Sea States is the Baltic Sea area's political cooperation body. It was established in 1992 and comprises the Foreign Ministers of the member countries plus a member of the Commission. Since 1995 Heads of Government-level meetings have been attended by the EU presidency. The latest summit was held in April 2000 in Kolding, Denmark. Cooperation is being built up step by step. Ministerial meetings have been held in ever more areas. There has been a permanent secretariat since autumn 1998, with its headquarters in Stockholm. A Business Advisory Council is attached to the Council.

1.1.4. There are also other Baltic Sea area and Barents Sea region forums for governmental cooperation in specialist areas:

- the Barents Euro-Arctic Council (BEAC), established in 1993, focusing chiefly on cooperation in the economic, social and environmental spheres, including nuclear safety in the Barents region. Member countries are Iceland, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark and Russia. The European Commission also participates. The Netherlands, the United Kingdom, Italy, Japan, Canada, Poland, France, Germany and the United States have observer status.

- the Arctic Council, dealing chiefly with the analysis and research aspects of environmental issues. Canada, the United States, Russia, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Norway and Iceland are Council members. The Council has also begun work on sustainable development in Arctic regions.

1.1.5. Other permanent cooperation structures have been set up:

- parliaments, have been cooperating since 1991. The ninth parliamentary conference on cooperation in the Baltic Sea area was held in Malmö in the summer of 2000, and most of the region's parliamentary bodies took part;

- the regions are cooperating in a comprehensive network (Baltic Sea States Subregional Cooperation - BSSSC) The thirteen counties and indigenous peoples of the Barents region have joined forces in the Barents Regional Council;

- some 100 towns and cities have been working together in a more formal organisation (the Union of Baltic Cities (UBC));

- chambers of commerce: as early as 1992, 52 Chambers of Commerce from the Baltic Sea area came together to form the Baltic Sea Chambers of Commerce Association (BCCA), with the aim of safeguarding their common business interests;

- trade unions: the area's main trade union organisations (21 in all, with 20 million members) set up the "Baltic Sea Trade Union Network" in 1999, in conjunction with the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC)'s conference in Helsinki. These organisations dialogue directly with the CBSS. In addition, there is a range of organisations - notably economic and social - which have built up cooperation on the basis of the Baltic Sea/Barents Sea geographic area.

1.1.6. Regional cross-border cooperation in the area covered by the Northern Dimension has been visibly boosted by the EU's Interreg programmes. A new generation of Interreg programmes (Interreg III) is being implemented during the financial period 2000-2006.

1.1.7. Although the focus tends to be on what is happening in the political structures, the steadily increasing direct contacts between people are the most important way of boosting a feeling of community and helping to ensure conflicts can be dealt with in a civilised manner. Contacts take place through trade, enterprise, tourism, exchanges between universities and, not least, cooperation between various types of organisation. English and Russian are the most useful languages here.

1.1.8 The ESC is particularly pleased to see that cross-border organisations for employers, trades unions and various economic and social interests are being set up within the region. The ESC too has played a part in this development.

1.2. Frameworks and instruments

1.2.1. The legal frameworks for the Northern Dimension are the Europe Agreements with the relevant applicant countries (entry into force in 1994 and 1995), the partnership and cooperation agreement with Russia (entry into force 1997), and the EEA agreement with Norway and Iceland (entry into force 1994).

1.2.2. The Community budget currently makes no specific provision for the Northern Dimension initiative. Activities are expected to be funded through coordinated use of Community funding, particularly under the Tacis programme (including Russia), and the Phare (democratic institutions), ISPA (environment and transport), Sapard (agriculture), and Interreg (border regions) pre-accession programmes. In addition, there are comprehensive national programmes, funded notably by the Scandinavian countries and Germany. International financial institutions, particularly the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the European Investment Bank (EIB), the World Bank and the Nordic Investment Bank (NIB), give substantial loans on easy terms. However, the EIB has not yet been involved in Russia. These different forms of public funding play an important part in smoothing the way for and boosting private investment throughout the region.

1.3. Broad political backing

1.3.1. At a common conference of foreign ministers in Helsinki in November 1999, the EU and its partner countries stated their conviction that the Northern Dimension will help to foster strong, positive, mutual inter-dependence between the EU and its Member States, other Baltic Sea Region countries and north-west Russia, thus enhancing safety, stability, democratic reforms and sustainable development in the region. The US "Northern European Initiative" (NEI), started in 1998, also aims to promote cooperation in the area covered by the Northern Dimension. Both the EU and the US, and the EU and Canada have made common declarations of their intention to promote the EU's Northern Dimension within the framework of the new trans-Atlantic agenda.

2. Previous ESC opinions

2.1. The ESC has addressed issues within the geographical scope of the Baltic Sea area and the concept of the Northern Dimension in a number of opinions, starting with the groundbreaking January 1997 Information Report on "Relations between the European Union and the countries bordering the Baltic Sea" (Filip Hamro-Drotz). The October 1999 opinion on the "EU's Northern Dimension and relations with Russia" (Filip Hamro-Drotz) highlighted the need for the EU, in accordance with the Cologne conclusions, to develop the Northern Dimension into an action programme for Northern Europe. The ESC also made a number of recommendations on how such a programme could be carried forward and what the content should be. The ESC particularly stressed that "within the context of the action programme, it must be ensured that civil society organisations can participate in development work".

2.2. The ESC is therefore pleased to note that the "Action plan for the Northern Dimension in external and cross-border policies of the European Union 2000-2003" was adopted at the Feira Summit on 19-20 June 2000. The rapid preparation of this action plan bears out the priority the Commission and the Member States give to further development of the Northern Dimension initiative. However, as can be seen below, that does not mean that the ESC is happy about all aspects of the action plan and the manner in which it took shape.

3. Action plan

3.1. In the introduction to the action plan it is stated that this plan will be a reference document for actions planned or implemented in the Northern Dimension during 2000-2003. It therefore serves as a political recommendation to be taken into account by relevant actors whenever appropriate. The aim is to achieve maximum added value from Community and national projects through coordination.

3.2. As the Northern Dimension is an ongoing process without a specific budgetary appropriation, it is pointed out that the action plan will require regular review as regards its frameworks and programmes and their respective priorities, as they are developed.

3.3. The actual action plan is in two parts: a horizontal part and an operational part.

3.3.1. Under the horizontal part, attention is drawn to the challenges facing Northern Europe - an area of particular significance to the EU. This region has great natural resources, with considerable human and economic potential. But it also faces big challenges in overcoming long distances, sparsely populated areas and a harsh climate, all of which require cross-border cooperation.

3.3.2. The operational part sets out aims and prospects for action during the period 2000-2003 in eight sectors in which most added value is expected.

3.4. The Feira European Council called on the Commission to play a leading role in implementing the action plan and proposing suitable follow-up measures in three areas: the environment (including nuclear safety), the fight against crime and the Kaliningrad situation. The Committee will comment on all these below.

3.5. The Heads of State and Government concluded by welcoming the future Swedish Presidency's intention to join forces with the Commission to prepare a full report to the Council on the Northern Dimension's political remit in preparation for the Gothenburg Summit in June 2001.

4. The ESC position

4.1. Development in the region

4.1.1. The ESC would first draw attention to positive trends in the region. These tend to be obscured since, for natural reasons, the region's problems tend to dominate both the political agenda and the image portrayed in the media.

4.1.2. The region's inhabitants, with their skills and determination to build a new and better future are the most important resource. The economy too is clearly thriving. The Baltic Sea area is indeed one of the fastest growing regions in the world. The knowledge-intensive sector, in particular, is flourishing. Finland and Sweden are amongst the world's top IT nations. Estonia is one of the countries in the region which are resolutely and successfully striving to speedily build up expertise and industrial activity in the IT sector. St. Petersburg university is considered to lead the world in training programmers. Scandinavian and German telecommunications companies are helping to rapidly expand modern telecommunications systems in the area. Facts such as these show its future potential.

4.1.3. In Russia GNP fell during most of the 1990's, but statistics are starting to show signs of improvement, especially in the industrial sector. In the St. Petersburg area and in north western Russia, the figures are 20 %-30 % for this sector. A 6.5 % growth rate is now forecast for 2000 and 3.5 % for 2001, with inflation being capped at 20 % and 17 % respectively(2).

4.1.4. The applicant countries - Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland - have come far in their negotiations to join the EU. This means they have long complied with the Copenhagen political criteria on inter alia, human rights and respect for and protection of minorities. Estonia and Latvia have complied with OSCE recommendations on citizenship and naturalisation for their large Russian minorities. The 2000 Commission report emphasises, however, the need for further measures to integrate the Russian population in these countries, and the ESC would also stress this. The Commission is of the opinion that all four countries can be regarded as effective market economies. Estonia and Poland are expected to be able to cope with EU competitive pressure and market forces "shortly". Latvia and Lithuania are expected to reach the same level "in the medium term". The legal and practical pre-conditions for investment have been stabilised. There has been substantial investment in the Baltic States - not least in the banking sector - largely from countries on the other side of the Baltic. The banking sector is now operative in all the applicant countries of the region. Foreign banks are increasing their share of the banking sector in Russia. Twelve of the biggest fifty banks are now foreign-controlled.

4.1.5. Transparency is improving and civil society is expanding. One good example of the progress made by Russian civil society is the fact that some 30 million Russians are members of trade union organisations which are so democratic and independent that they were granted membership of the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) in December 2000.

4.1.6. Economic growth and the beginnings of an effective market economy do not mean that problems have vanished. There is still a great gap between living standards in the transition economies of the region and in the Western countries. The gaps are also increasing within these countries. The EU's future eastern flank is threatening to be one of the poorest borders in the world. Unemployment and under-employment are still high. Corruption is a major problem and social scourge. Russia still lacks a legal framework for worker protection comparable to ILO standards(3).

4.2. The action plan's perspective

4.2.1. The ESC is not casting doubts on any of the areas of action listed in the plan, all of which are priorities. However, it does criticise the plan's limited perspective. The ESC has previously stressed that the "objective of the northern dimension must be to reduce the political, economic and social divergencies between these societies" in the northern part of Europe. The ESC fears that because the Feira Summit's call to the Commission to propose further suitable follow-up measures is confined to the spheres of environmental and nuclear safety, the fight against organised crime and the Kaliningrad situation, action plan activities could be constricted and social issues pushed further into the background.

4.2.2. The ESC believes that the sectoral and functional aspects of the action plan can be effective in getting activities off the ground quickly. However, a territorial, cross-border perspective will be needed to coordinate activities and to create synergies. The ESC would point to the positive experiences of the Interreg programme in the area, and recommend that the territorial perspective should be highlighted when implementing the action plan.

4.2.3. In the ESC's view, far greater priority should be given to reducing divergencies both between countries and internally than was done in the action plan. That would be in line with the new emphasis of the Phare and Tacis programme.

4.2.4. In the current Draft Communication on Phare(4), emphasis is placed on Phare's role in beginning to address the wide development disparities that exist between the applicant countries and the existing Member States. One of the main messages is the Phare can begin to help the countries develop the structures, procedures and programmes they will need to use the Structural Funds efficiently and effectively after accession.

4.2.5. Similarly, the Tacis programme is being reshaped. The new Regulation (1999/2000) focuses on problems instead of on sectors such as energy, environment, etc. The new indicative programme 2000-2003 for Russia will prioritise three areas of economic and social relevance: "support for institutional, legal and administrative reform", "support to the private sector and assistance for economic development" and "support in addressing the social consequences of transition".

4.2.6. Both Phare and Tacis attach importance to involving civil society organisations. These actors' contribution in bringing about change is highlighted in a number of contexts. The Northern Dimension action plan makes no mention of them at all. That is regrettable and gives a totally distorted idea of the potential vested in the Northern Dimension initiative. The ESC would draw attention to the conclusions of the EU Foreign Ministers' meeting in Helsinki in November 1999, when the Council recommended that civil society organisations in the relevant countries should step up cooperation within the framework of the Northern Dimension.

4.2.7. In this connection it is also important to point out that, following on from an initiative from the Baltic Sea summit in Kolding, the June 2000 CBSS meeting in Bergen called on the Baltic Sea States' employment ministers and on the social partners to launch a dialogue on labour market and related issues.

4.2.8. In this light, the ESC urges that the importance of involving civil society organisations, at both national and cross-border level, be highlighted in the implementation of the Northern Dimension and in future information and planning relating to its action. In the ESC's view, the close association of the Baltic Sea area organisations with the Northern Dimension initiative will ultimately generate the greatest added value.

4.3. Specific sections of the action plan

4.3.1. Infrastructure (energy systems, transport and telecommunications/information society)

4.3.1.1. This section of the action plan appears to be the best thought out. As regards energy, on 2 December 1999 the Council (energy ministers) endorsed a number of priority proposals (Strengthening the Northern Dimension of Energy Policy in Europe, Conclusions). The proposals were based on a proposal adopted by the area's energy ministers at a meeting in Helsinki on 25 October 1999.

4.3.1.2. Expansion of energy, transport, telecommunications and IT infrastructure is crucial to connecting up the north and north-eastern parts of Europe to the rest of the continent, including by expanding the trans-European networks eastwards, so that the region's economic potential can be exploited to the full. Reinforced cooperation between the EU and Russia in the field of energy was agreed at the Paris Summit on 30 October 2000, demonstrating that cooperation with Russia is important for the EU as a whole.

4.3.1.3. The ESC would emphasise that investment in infrastructure should also include expanding "missing links" - including in trans-European networks - such as technical harmonisation, in order to facilitate economic integration in the region.

4.3.1.4. The region has a very high profile IT sector. The potential for further advances should be taken on board through reinforced cooperation. It is in this respect that the ESC welcomes a CBSS initiative from countries such as Finland and Estonia to frame specific proposals for inclusion in the Northern Dimension action plan.

4.3.2. Environment and natural resources, including nuclear safety

4.3.2.1. The action plan commendably highlights environmental issues and lists a large number of measures that should be taken. The ESC would particularly stress the need for immediate measures to update and expand the sewerage system in the St. Petersburg region. This is crucial to the whole Baltic region.

4.3.2.2. The emphasis on environmental issues has, however, meant that forestry has only been addressed from a conservation standpoint. The ESC regrets the lack of debate on how growth in the huge forest areas, particularly in north west Russia, could be exploited more fully to boost investment and trade, and consequently economic growth and employment in the area. The ESC would highlight the collective industrial, technical and scientific expertise which has been garnered in the regions as a result of the fact that most of Europe's natural forestry is to be found in northern Scandinavia, applicant country areas and Russia. Continued planning efforts should pay greater attention to this.

4.3.2.3. As regards nuclear power stations, nuclear vessels and nuclear waste in the area, not just the EU and the countries in the area, but also a number of other countries are involved technically, financially and personally in working out timely, sustainable solutions. Even so, this is not enough. Further efforts are needed, inter alia to deal with the enormous quantities of nuclear waste in north-west Russia. This will require closer cooperation with the Russian authorities.

4.3.2.4. The fact that the issue of closing certain power stations is dealt with separately from energy questions makes implementation discussions more difficult. As the action plan progresses, safety issues should be included in the substantive debate on measures to update the energy systems. This would make it possible to focus on future-oriented investment and employment issues.

4.3.2.5. The ESC would again point out that the European Council meeting in Helsinki called on the Commission to draw up a proposal for a long term strategy to dovetail programmes for economically, socially and ecologically sustainable development. It is to be submitted to the Stockholm Council in June 2001. The ESC believes that the strategy should address the need for sustainable modernisation of energy and production systems, including in the ecologically sensitive Baltic Sea area.

4.3.3. Public health

4.3.3.1. Health problems in the region are largely a result of social inequality and environmental impact. In both Russia and the applicant countries, infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, syphilis, jaundice and diphtheria have started to re-emerge. Alcohol- and drug abuse cause great problems in many areas, and high death rates, particularly for men. HIV/AIDS have grown to epidemic proportions. Women are reluctant to have children because they feel socially vulnerable. Healthcare standards and capacity vary considerably, particularly as regards preventive care. This also holds true for social services.

4.3.3.2. The action plan is rooted in the Treaty chapters on public health, and in Article 152 which states that the Community and the Member States must promote cooperation in this sphere with third countries and stakeholder international organisations. The proposed cooperation is therefore somewhat narrow. However, the bilateral initiatives are quite wide-ranging.

4.3.3.3. The ESC believes that there should be closer cooperation with the general aim of improving healthcare and welfare services, in order to narrow the gaps in social standards between different parts of the region. Accordingly, the ESC welcomes the fact that the programme provides for measures to support Russia in implementing health and welfare reforms. As with other transition economies, an overhaul of the legal and administrative systems is needed as a result of the privatisation of formerly state-owned companies. These measures must, however, be developed and put into practice. The ESC feels that civil society organisations in the region should be involved in this work.

4.3.4. Trade, business cooperation and investment promotion

4.3.4.1. Trade and investment flows between the EU and the applicant countries of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland are increasing rapidly, while economic ties with Russia are becoming relatively less important. All except Lithuania are WTO members, although Lithuania does have an agreement with the WTO which is expected to be ratified in May 2001.

4.3.4.2. Trade and investment flows between the EU and Russia have not yet reached the proportions warranted by the economic strength, degree of development and proximity of the two areas. Dismantling barriers in this area would make for increased production and better standards of living, and speed up industrial modernisation and restructuring.

4.3.4.3. Efforts to assist Russia in preparing for WTO membership and in removing barriers to trade, e.g. as regards customs procedures and goods certification, should therefore be intensified, as a first step towards, in the longer term, a free trade agreement, in accordance with the objectives set out in the EU-Russia Partnership and Cooperation Agreement.

4.3.4.4. Furthermore, closer cooperation is needed to create a better legal and administrative climate for both domestic and foreign investment. This is essential if market players are to invest more proactively in, inter alia, industry and services, and agriculture and forestry.

4.3.4.5. It is essential to harness the investment arm of Phare's "social and economic cohesion" priority area, and its Tacis and Interreg counterparts, so that small and medium-sized enterprises have better access to funding and quality development support.

4.3.5. Human resources development and research

4.3.5.1. The human resources and scientific know-how available in the region covered by the Northern Dimension must be taken on board and developed. Cooperation between the region's universities and other higher education institutions must be stepped up. Far too little use is made of student/researcher exchange programmes and research institute networking. The Committee believes that this area is very important to the democratic, economic and social development of the region.

4.3.5.2. The ESC welcomes the fact that the new Tempus programme for Russia addresses the development of non-academic public and private institutions, including those directly linked to the development of civil society.

4.3.5.3. Priority should be given to cooperation projects in the form of targeted educational initiatives which address how democracy and the market economy work. Such initiatives are best implemented through coordination between civil society organisations.

4.3.5.4. Foreign language instruction should be a priority, not least in order to facilitate cross-border contacts of various types. The ESC finds it natural to emphasise this point in 2001 - European Year of Languages.

4.3.6. Action to combat cross-border crime

4.3.6.1. Since 1996, the Council of the Baltic Sea States has had a special working group on the fight against organised crime. This means that all the Northern Dimension's partners take part. The group cooperates on questions relating to police, customs, coastguard and prosecution services. It is especially active in illegal immigration, money-laundering, stolen cars, smuggling, prostitution, drugs and corruption. Its mandate has been extended until the end of 2004.

4.3.6.2. The EU recently adopted a plan for common initiatives to combat organised crime together with Russia, which endorsed the plan.

4.3.6.3. The ESC takes a very positive view of current cooperation efforts, and believes the above-mentioned working group should be given permanent status. The Committee would highlight in particular the need for support to develop common investigation and reporting systems in the region, and for a review of the remit of the authorities concerned. However, when framing any measures, it is important to ensure that they cause the least possible disruption to legal trade, investment and mobility within the region. "Green channels" could be introduced, for example, whereby firms which have passed quality assurance checks would benefit from simplified customs formalities.

4.3.7. Regional and cross-border cooperation

4.3.7.1. Cooperation in cross-border regions is of vital importance to the successful enlargement of the EU, and to the development of EU-Russia relations which can be beneficial to the whole region. The action plan lists a number of measures which aim to achieve this. At the Paris summit, the EU and Russia expressed their desire to step up regional and cross-border cooperation, particularly as part of the Northern Dimension.

4.3.7.2. The ESC would particularly stress that any concrete projects which are planned must focus on improving people-to-people contacts and facilitating mobility in cross-border regions. They should also help narrow the economic gaps in those regions and raise living standards in areas which lag behind. In this context, cooperation between civil society organisations is of crucial importance.

4.3.8. Kaliningrad

4.3.8.1. The ESC welcomes the fact that Kaliningrad Oblast has been given a specific heading. When the neighbouring countries of Lithuania and Poland have joined the EU, this area - half the size of Belgium - will become a Russian enclave within the EU, 300 kilometres from its motherland. The economic and social situation in this Russian region is currently cause for some considerable concern. Development in Kaliningrad is of vital importance to the whole region, and to EU-Russia relations.

4.3.8.2. Special efforts should be made to facilitate economic cooperation and reduce the economic, social and environmental disparities between the Kaliningrad region and surrounding areas in Lithuania and Poland.

4.3.8.3. The ESC welcomes the fact that Russia and Lithuania have together applied for EU aid under the Tacis and Phare programmes, within the framework of the Northern Dimension, inter alia for modernisation of the road link via the Lithuanian capital Vilnius, gas pipes through Lithuania to Kaliningrad, environmental action and a "Euro Faculty" at Kaliningrad University.

4.3.8.4. The ESC welcomes the Commission's special study of 17 January 2001(5) on Kaliningrad, whose purpose is to stimulate debate between the EU and Russia (including Kaliningrad) and the two neighbour countries which are to join the EU - Poland and Lithuania - on matters with an impact on their common future. It is intended to discuss the Kaliningrad issue at the EU-Russia Summit in Moscow in May 2001.

4.3.8.5. The study mentions that a local office to provide support for the Tacis programme was set up in December 2000. This office will encourage participation by local actors (e.g. education and training bodies, non-governmental organisations, trade unions, the media, sectoral organisations, enterprises, municipalities and the courts) in joint programmes with EU organisations. The ESC naturally welcomes this positive contribution to the practical application of the action plan for the EU's Northern Dimension.

4.4. Implementation

4.4.1. The ESC welcomes the Summit's call for the Commission to play a leading role in implementing the action plan. That is necessary to keep up momentum. The ESC understands that an inter-departmental group comprising representatives of all DGs affected by the action plan met in September 2000, and that there are ongoing bilateral contacts between the DGs affected by the three priority areas. The Commission also points out that there are many up-and-running projects with a Northern Dimension slant, and that common Northern Dimension measures are planned with the US and Canada, within the framework of the new Trans-Atlantic Agenda.

4.4.2. The fact that the Commission has a central role should not, however, lead to a reduced commitment from other parties. The ESC would strongly underline that a basic premise for a positive outcome is that Russia and other non-EU countries, i.e. applicant countries and EEA countries, can engage fully and work for the continued development of the Northern Dimension. The commitment of individual EU Member States is, of course, equally important.

4.4.3. With this in mind the ESC would draw attention to the CBSS's stated willingness to play an active role in the future development and implementation of key areas in the action plan. In the press release issued at its meeting in Bergen on 21-22 June 2000 the CBSS stated as follows: "The CBSS is actively involved in regional co-operation in a number of areas covered by the action plan. The Council stands ready to come up with concrete proposals for inclusion in the evolving action plan. The Council furthermore stands ready to offer the resources of its working bodies for co-ordination and as possible instruments for implementation and concretisation of elements of the action plan in areas such as health, information technology, energy, trade and investment, environment and the combat against organised crime. The CBSS can also act as a channel of co-operation with sub-regional actors(6)."

4.4.4. The Council of the Baltic Sea States, the Barents Sea Council and the Arctic Council can play a decisive role by determining their common priorities and arranging for projects to be co-funded by regional and international financial institutions and by the private sector. It is of course an advantage that the Commission is involved in the work of these regional bodies, and also in their specialist sub-committees.

4.4.5. The ESC feels that it is important for the Nordic countries too to prioritise the practical achievement of the Northern Dimension in their cooperation efforts within the Nordic Council and the Nordic Council of Ministers.

4.5. Implementation and continued development of the action plan

4.5.1. Implementation of the action plan is an ongoing process which requires regular review. As will be clear from the above, the ESC feels that the plan needs to be reshaped in a number of major respects.

4.5.2. In the ESC's view, the necessary development would be facilitated by involving civil society organisations in Northern Europe much more closely than hitherto. Here the responsibility lies with the organisations themselves but also with all relevant authorities: at European, Baltic, Barents Sea, national and local level.

4.5.3. EU efforts under the Tacis programme need to be integrated with Phare, ISPA, Sapard and Interreg, in order to rapidly set up effective cross-border projects in northern Europe. However, there are currently significant bureaucratic obstacles to this. Tacis, for example, is highly centralised and focuses on large-scale projects, whilst Interreg is being increasingly devolved to the Member States. The ESC therefore feels that a separate budget heading for the implementation of the Northern Dimension action plan should be created as soon as possible. There would be no need for new funds: specific cooperation funds for the Northern Dimension could be set aside from the above programmes. The funds could be used to find a way through existing red tape, and also act as a catalyst to attract other forms of public and private funding. This is particularly important to make things easier for small and medium-sized enterprises, and to involve civil society to a greater degree.

4.5.4. The ESC would particularly stress the need for businesses and international financial institutions to work with governments on the continued planning arrangements. This is especially important to get planned large-scale infrastructure projects off the ground quickly.

4.6. The ESC calls for further multilateral cooperation in the area

4.6.1. The ESC has tried to mobilise representatives of employers, workers and other economic and social interests throughout the Baltic Sea area during the preparation of this opinion. For example, in liaison with the Swedish Presidency, it organised a conference in Umeå on 5-6 February 2001, where the ESC's REX section debated with invited representatives from relevant organisations in Russia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Norway and Iceland. The discussions were based largely on the replies received to the written questions sent to the relevant organisations in the Baltic Sea area.

4.6.2. The ESC's purpose in these contacts is also to help foster awareness of the Northern Dimension among organisations in the countries concerned and, in accordance with the Helsinki Foreign Ministers' Council recommendation, to explore the openings for closer cooperation in a multilateral forum.

5. Conclusions for the future

5.1. The EU's Northern Dimension is an effective instrument on which all Northern Europe can draw for the purpose of finding solutions to problems and stepping up positive development. The initiative will facilitate the successful accession of the applicant countries of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland. It also helps to forge closer ties between the EU and Russia, underpinned by the EU-Russia partnership and cooperation agreement; the EU's strategy for Russia and Russia's corresponding programme for stepping up relations with the EU.

5.2. Despite its scope, the approach of the action plan for 2000-2003 is far too one-sided. Priority must be focused on bridging gaps between and within countries in the area. A sine qua non for narrowing these gaps is that business and labour relations must develop in accordance with European social market economy principles.

5.3. It is of fundamental importance that, in its cooperation with partner countries, the EU should be resolute in putting the action plan into practice and determine specific goals with set deadlines for the various components. A common Northern European strategy is needed for the successful implementation of the action plan. This will also require a common planning and follow-up forum for all stakeholders.

5.4. The ESC welcomes the willingness of the Council of the Baltic Sea States (CBSS) to cooperate in carrying through the action plan and to act as intermediary within the region. This will be a major asset in future efforts.

5.5. The ESC is keen that funding management should allow the action plan's individual projects to be implemented speedily and without unnecessary red tape. Such arrangements must also be framed so as to enable coordination between the various funders, including international financial institutions, to generate synergies. The ESC recommends creating a specific budget heading for the Northern Dimension.

5.6. The economic and social players of civil society organisations must be involved throughout the launching, implementation, monitoring and continued development of Northern Dimension-related activities. Authorities at all levels should cooperate to this end.

5.7. The ESC, for its part, intends to pursue dialogue in appropriate forms with the economic and social representatives of civil society organisations in the Baltic Sea area, including Russia. The experience of the first multilateral meeting in Umeå has shown that there is every reason to pursue this kind of dialogue.

5.8. The ESC suggests that the EU, as an institutional cooperation partner, should decide to establish regular multilateral contacts between the economic and social actors of civil society in the countries concerned. This is to promote a better understanding of the major issues relevant to the Northern Dimension and to improve mutual understanding of economic and social realities.

5.9. The ESC notes that, unlike the Europe Agreements and the EEA Agreement, the EU-Russia Cooperation Agreement contains no article referring to the possibility of establishing a forum to develop contacts between the economic and social partners. The ESC believes that EU-Russia relations have now progressed to a stage where a cooperation forum for the partner country players should be set up. Such a forum could be designed as a mixed committee, to which the ESC offers to contribute. This would help to develop the mutual contacts sought by both the EU and Russia. The ESC intends to draft a special opinion on EU-Russia relations.

5.10. The ESC intends to monitor continually developments in the Northern Dimension, and to produce a new opinion when the time is appropriate.

6. Follow-up

6.1. The ESC is pleased to note that EU foreign ministers are to hold a conference on the Northern Dimension on 9 April 2001 in Luxembourg. The ESC proposes that the present opinion be taken on board in the conference preparations.

6.2. The ESC welcomes the Swedish Presidency's intention of preparing, in liaison with the Commission, a detailed report to the Council on the Northern Dimension's political remit in preparation for the Gothenburg Summit in June 2001. The ESC would suggest that this opinion be borne in mind when that report is compiled.

Brussels, 28 February 2001.

The President

of the Economic and Social Committee

Göke Frerichs

(1) Financial Times, 20 December 2000.

(2) Emerging Europe Monitor No. 8, November 2000.

(3) This is mentioned in the Tacis Regulation, 14199/99 Annex 3, point 5.

(4) Communication from the Commission, Phare 2000 review, 27.10.2000, C(2000) 3103/2.

(5) Communication from the Commission to the Council on the EU and Kaliningrad, COM(2001) 26 final.

(6) On taking up the Presidencyof the CBSS, in July 2000, Germany made immediate moves in this direction. In a letter (dated 27.7.2000) to various organisations in the Baltic Sea area, Ambassador Hans-Jürgen Heimsoeth requested them to list existing and future projects in their respective areas and to reply by mid-November. The aim is to present the list to the Commission and the Swedish Presidency in March 2001.