19.4.93 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC108/53
Opinionon:
—theproposalforaCouncilRegulation(EEC)establishingacohesionfinancialinstrument,
and
—theRevisedDraftProposalforaCouncilRegulation(EEC)establishingaCohesion
Fund(*)
(93/C108/16)
On1February1993theCouncildecidedtoconsulttheEconomicandSocialCommittee,
underArticle198oftheTreatyestablishingtheEuropeanEconomicCommunity,onthe
abovementioned proposals.
TheSectionforRegionalDevelopmentandTownandCountryPlanning,whichwasrespon­
sibleforpreparingtheCommittee'sworkonthesubject,adopteditsOpinionon16February
1993.TheRapporteurwasMrGiesecke.
Atits303rdPlenarySession(meetingof25February1993),theEconomicandSocial
CommitteeadoptedthefollowingOpinionbyamajorityvote,with1voteagainstand
3abstentions .
2.1.2.TheCommitteewelcomestheproposedearly
introductionofafinancialinstrumenttorununtilthe
CohesionFundisestablishedaftertheratificationof
theMaastrichtTreaty.1.Keyrecommendations bytheCommittee
1.1.TheCommitteesupportstheCommission'spro­
posals.Itwouldalsoaddthefollowingpointsinpar­
ticular.
2.1.3.ThenewFundwilloperateinStateswitha
percapitaGrossNationalProduct(GNP)oflessthan
90%oftheCommunityaverage.Itwillthushelpto
concentrateCommunityaidgeographically .Thisprom­
isestomakeCommunityregionalaidmoreeffective
andisthereforeendorsedbytheCommittee .TheCommittee :
—callsforclearenvironmental criteria(2.2.4);
—callsforaclearerdefinitionofmulti-stageprojects
incaseswhereaidisstopped(2.3.1);
—amplifiesthecriterialaiddowninEdinburghfor
eligibleprojects(3.1.2);
—proposesacleardivisionofworkinthedecision­
makingprocedure(3.3.3);
—recommendsthattheregionsandthesocialinterest
groupsbeconsultedatanearlystage(3.3.4);
—proposesanearlierreviewdatefortheRegulation
establishingaCohesionFund(3.5.2).2.1.4.Theimpactofregionalaidmeasuresdepends
verymuchonwhethertheyarecoordinated.Thecre­
ationofthisadditionalnewFundincreasestheneed
forcoordination .Thisaspectmustbetakeninto
accountwhenselectingprojectstobeassistedfromthe
CohesionFund.
2.1.5.Regionaldevelopmentisalsoinfluencedby
otherCommunitypolicies.InthisconnectiontheCom­
mitteestressestheimportanceoftherelevantprovisions
ofTreatyArticle130b.2.GeneralcommentsontheobjectivesoftheFund
2.1.Reinforcementofthecohesionobjective
2.1.1.ThedecisionstakenbytheEuropeanCouncil
inEdinburghonceagainstressedtheimportanceofthe
objectiveofcohesion.TheCommitteeendorsesthe
specialstressplaceduponthisobjective.2.1.6.IncontrasttotheStructuralFunds,thenew
FundisaimedatMemberStatesandnotatregions.
IntheCommittee'sviewthiswillcreateadditional
opportunitiestoconcentrateStructuralFundaidonthe
specificproblemsofparticularareasinthebeneficiary
MemberStates.Theseopportunitiesshouldbeexploit­
edwhentheStructuralFundRegulationsarereformed
andtheiraidprogrammesestablished. (!)OJNoC38,12.2.1993,p.18-21.

NoC108/54 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 19.4.93
2.2.PromotionofCommunityobjectivesinthefields
oftrans-European networks(transport)and
environmentmunityprogrammeofpolicyinrelationtotheenviron­
ment.
2.3.Assistancetobeconditionalonanationalconver­
genceprogramme2.2.1.TheCohesionFundlinksthestrengtheningof
economicandsocialcohesionwiththeattainmentof
Communityobjectivesinthefieldsoftrans-European
networks(transport)andenvironment .TheCommittee
isconvincedthatthedevelopmentoftrans-European
networksandsupportforenvironmental investments
intheless-prosperous MemberStatescangiveasub­
stantialboosttodevelopmentintheassistedregions.
Intheeventthatthegapbetweenregionswithina
beneficiaryMemberStatewidensasaresultof
CohesionFundaid,suitablecompensatory measures
wouldhavetobetaken,includingtheuseofStructural
Fundresources.
2.2.2.ThecreationoftheCohesionFundwillmulti­
plytheCommunity'saidopportunitiesinthetwofields
inquestion.BesidestheStructuralFunds,otherCom­
munitypoliciesprovideforaidinstrumentsand
measuresinspecificfields.Coordinationbetweenthese
activitiescanconsiderablyenhancetheefficiencyofthe
Fundmeasures.2.3.1.AssistanceundertheCohesionFundiscon­
ditionalonthebeneficiaryMemberStatehavinga
programmedesignedtofulfiltheconvergencecriteria
setoutinArticle104coftheMaastrichtTreaty.Under
theCommission'sproposalforsuspensionoffinancing
incertaincircumstances ,thereis,however,adanger
thatCohesionFundassistancecouldbestoppedatan
inopportunemomentandthusfailtoachieveitspur­
pose.NeverthelesstheproposedRegulationstipulates
thattheconvergenceconditionistobeappliedonlyin
respectofnewprojectsandnewstagesinmulti-stage
projects.IftheMemberStatefallsbackintolinewith
theconvergencecondition,thesuspensionofacceptance
ofnewprojectsandprojectstagesmaybelifted.The
Committeeregardsthisasasensiblecourseofaction.
Itdoes,however,consideramoreprecisedefinition
ofmulti-stageprojectsnecessaryifuncertaintyinthe
applicationofthisprovisionistobeavoided.2.2.3.Theassistancefortrans-European networks
coversonlytransport(notonlyroadandrail,butalso
seaandairtransport).Continuousinnovationandthe
internationalization oftheeconomymakethedevelop­
mentofintegratednetworksnecessary.Forthisreason
networksmustbeestablishedinotherareas(telecom­
munications,energy),too,inparalleltothetransport
networksassistedbytheCohesionFund.Suchnetworks
shouldbetakenintoaccountinStructuralFundaid
andtheMemberStates'ownefforts.2.3.2.TheCommissionproposalcreatingthe
CohesionFundstipulatesthattheCouncilmay,excep­
tionally,defersuspensioninthecaseofprojectsdirectly
affectingmorethanoneMemberState.Thelackof
criteriafortheseexceptions—inparticularthetypes
ofprojectaffected—isapotentialsourceofuncertainty
inthegrantingofaid.Thereisaclearneedtobemore
specific.TheCommitteeconsidersthatthisprovision
canbeappliedonlytomulti-stageprojects.2.2.4.Clearcriteriaareneededfordecidingwhich
environmental projectsareeligibleforaid,otherwise
thereisariskthatenvironmental protectionobjectives
willnotbemet.Thecriteriamust,however,beflexible
enoughtoallowforthespecificcircumstancesofthe
beneficiaryStates.TheCommitteeassumesthatcare
willbetakentoensureenvironmental criteriaaremet
bytrans-European networkschemesassistedthrough
theCohesionFund. 2.3.3.Inviewofthespecialimportanceforeconomic
developmentofthetwofieldscoveredbytheFund,
beneficiaryStatesshouldnotuseassistancefromthe
Fundorcompliancewiththeconvergencecriteriaasa
reasonforreducingtheirowneffortsintherelevanttwo
fields.TheCommitteethereforewelcomestheproposed
requirement—insteadoftheadditionalityprinciple—
forthebeneficiaryStatestomaintaintheirownefforts
inthesetwofieldsatleastattheirpresentlevel.2.2.5.ThenewFundwillcreateadditionaloppor­
tunitiestostudytheimpactandimplementation of
Communitypoliciesinthesetwoareas.Hencethe
experienceacquiredfromthesemeasuresshouldalso
beevaluatedfromtheaspectofthesespecificpolicies.
Hereitshouldbeborneinmindthattherearedifferent
waysofencouragingtheattainmentoftheobjectives
inthetwofields,e.g.throughtaxincentives.TheCom­
mitteealsoseesthisasapracticalopportunitytoset
priorities,ascalledforinitsOpinion(^ontheCom­2.3.4.IfCohesionFundassistancehastobestopped
inaMemberStateonaccountoftheconvergence
criteria,thesumsearmarkedundertheindicativeallo­
cationshouldnotbelost.ThiswouldgivetheMember
Stateanincentivetoadheretotheconvergencecriteria
infuture. (MOJNoC287,4.11.1992.

19.4.93 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities NoC108/55
3.Specificcomments CohesionFundcomesintooperation.Inrespectof
environmental projectsespecially,itwouldbesensible
tobuildupareservesoastoensureflexibility.
3.2.2.ThespecificproblemsofthebeneficiaryStates
inthefieldsconcernedshouldbeakeycriterioninthe
indicativeallocationoffunds.TheCommitteetherefore
welcomestheindicationstothis,effectintheDraft
Regulations .
3.2.3.TheDraftDirectivesprovidedforanappropri­
atebalancebetweenthetwofieldsofintervention .This
shouldnotstandinthewayofflexibility,ascould
happenif,forexample,anattemptweremadetoachie­
veanappropriatebalanceineveryyearofthepro­
gramme.Areasonablebalanceshouldthereforebe
reachedoveralongerperiod.3.1.Needforaclearlegalbasisandclearrulesonthe
selectionofprojects
3.1.1.ThenewFundtiesinwiththeMaastricht
decisionsatvariouspoints.Thereforethecreationof
theFundcannoteasilybeseparatedfromtheMaastricht
decisions.Tominimizeanylegaluncertaintywhichthis
maycause,thelifeoftheinterimRegulationshouldbe
strictlylimited.
3.1.2.Legalclarityisalsorequiredindetermining
whichprojectsareeligible.Forthis,clearcriteriaare
neededfortheselectionofprojects.Clearcriteriawill
alsoenhancethetransparencyoftheselectionpro­
cedure.Finally,thecriteriashouldhelptoensurethat
fundsareusedefficiently.
TheDraftRegulationssetoutcriteriafortheprojects.
Keyconditionsare:benefitstobecommensurate with
costs,thecontributionwhichprojectscanmaketothe
implementation ofCommunitypoliciesontheenviron­
mentandtrans-European networks,consistencywith
otherCommunitystructuralmeasures.TheCommittee
considersthatgenerallyspeakingthislistofcriteriawill
helptofurthertheaimsoftheFund.However,the
environmental criteria,inparticular,needtobespelt
out.
Thelistcouldalsobesupplementedtoincreasethe
effectivenessoftheFund:
—PriorityshouldbegiventoprojectsofCommunity­
wideimportance .
—Consideration shouldalsobegiventowhetherthe
projectcouldbecarriedoutbytheprivatesector
withoutassistance .
—Toincreasethebenefitsfromtheassistedprojects,
itshouldalsobeensuredthatasufficientnumber
ofprojectoptionsareexaminedfromtheangleof
theircontributiontotheattainmentoftheproposed
objectives.
Toensurethatassistancehasamaximumimpact,care
shouldbetakentoselectprojectswhichcanonlybe
carriedoutwithpublicaidandwhichbestfulfilthe
criteria.3.3.Decision-making proceduresfortheselectionof
projects
3.3.1.Lengthydecision-making procedurescanpre­
ventassistancemeasuresfromhavingarapidimpact.
TheCommitteethereforewelcomestherequirement
fortheCommissiontodecideonproposedprojects
generallywithinthreemonths.Thisruleshouldbe
respectedunlesstherearegoodgroundsformakingan
exception.
3.3.2.TheMemberStatesaretoberesponsiblefor
establishingtherelativepriorityofprojects.Todothis,
theyrequirecomprehensive information.TheCom­
mitteethereforeregardsthetechnicalassistancetobe
providedunderthisFundasanimportantaidmeasure
whichshouldbewidelyused.
3.3.3.Toensurethattheprojectselectionprocedure
runssmoothly,theresponsibilities ofthoseinvolvedin
thedecision-making processshouldbeclearlydemar­
cated.TheDraftRegulationsstipulatethatprojects
shallbedecideduponbytheCommissioninagreement
withtheMemberStateconcerned.Thereisnoclear
separationofresponsibilities inthisprocedure.Inthe
interestsofefficiency,theCommitteeconsidersthat
theCommission'smaintasksinthedecision-making
procedureshouldbe:
—tocheckthatthedocumentsarecompleteandwell­
groundedandthattheproposedprojectsarecom­
patiblewithCommunitypolicies;
—toapplytheselectioncriterialaiddowninthe
Regulationsestablishingtheinteriminstrumentand
theCohesionFund;
—tocoordinatetheproposedprojectsofoneMember
StatewithprojectsorstructuresinotherMember
States,includingthosenotassistedfromthe
CohesionFund.
3.3.4.Theprojectsaretohavebothamacro-anda
micro-economic impactoverafairlylongtime-scale.
Forthisreasontheparticipationofboththeregions3.2.Allocationofthefunds
3.2.1.TheCommitteeapprovesthewayinwhich
theappropriation isdividedupoverthelifeofthe
programmesoastogivethebeneficiaryStatesplanning
security.Theappropriationfortheperiodupto1999
shouldnot,however,befullycommittedassoonasthe

NoC108/56 OfficialJournaloftheEuropeanCommunities 19.4.93
concernedandthesocialgroupsintheFundprocedures
isespeciallyimportant.Theirparticipationwillinpar­
ticularbringawiderrangeofexpertisetobearonthe
selectionofprojects.Atthesametimethiswouldhelp
clarifywhethernon-publicsectorbodiesshouldpartici­
pateintheproject.Theirparticipationwillalsomakeit
easiertocoordinateCommunity-assisted projectswith
otherprojects.Inordertoobtainthesebenefits,the
MemberStatesshouldberequiredtoconsultsocial
groupsingoodtimeonproposedprojects,beforethey
aresubmittedtotheCommission .
3.4.Monitoringandassessment
3.4.1.AsaruletheCohesionFundwillassistprojects
whichtakeseveralyearstocompleteandrequiresub­
stantialfunding.Thismakesconstant,intensivemoni­
toringandassessmentofindividualprojectsevenmore
important.Tobeabletodothis,thesupportingdocu­
mentationmustbeofsufficientlyhighquality.The
Committeewouldthereforestressthatadecisionshould
betakenonaproposedprojectonlyiftheMember
Statepresentssufficientlyprecisesupportingdocuments
fortheproposedprojecttobeassessed.Itisparticularly
necessarytoensurethat,uponcompletion,projectswill
beviable.
3.4.2.Verylong-termprojectsinparticularshould
bemonitoredfromtimetotimetoensurethatthe
efficiencycriteriaarestillbeingmet.TheCommittee
thinksthatcorrectionsshouldbemadetoprojects
whichdeviatesubstantially .Thenatureandamountof
furtherCommunityassistancewouldthenhavetobe
determinedonacase-by-casebasis.
3.4.3.InitsDraftRegulationonthefinancialinstru­
ment,theCommissionproposesthataprocedurelaiddownbyRegulation(EEC)No4253/88of19December
1988beusedwhereappropriate.UndertheDraftRegu­
lationestablishingaCohesionFund,theCouncil,acting
byaqualifiedmajorityonaproposalfromtheCom­
mission,istolaydownitsownoperationalprovisions
formonitoringandassessingprojects.TheCommittee
cannotseethejustificationforthesedifferentpro­
cedures.Asitistobeexpectedthattheessentialsofa
project'sfuturedevelopmentwillgenerallybeestab­
lishedatanearlystage,assessmentandmonitoringat
thisstageisparticularlyimportant.TheCommittee
thereforeregardsitasimportantthatbasicprovisions
ontheassessmentandmonitoringprocedurebe
includedintheRegulationssettingupthefinancial
instrumentandtheCohesionFund.
3.4.4.Specificparticipationofthesocialgroupsin
theassessmentandmonitoringprocedurewillincrease
transparencyintheimplementation ofprojectsand
broadentheexpertisebasefortheirassessment.Such
participationshouldbeprovidedforintheRegulations .
3.5.ReportsandreexaminationoftheRegulations
3.5.1.TheCohesionFundservesmanypurposesand
hasseveralfeatureswhichmarkitapartfromprevious
aidinstruments—thelinkingofassistancetoanational
convergenceprogrammeforinstance.Theseaspects
shouldreceivespecialattentionintheCommission's
proposedannualreports.
3.5.2.ThespecialfeaturesoftheFundjustifyan
earlyreviewoftheCohesionFundRegulation.The
Committeecallsforareexamination earlierthanthe
1999providedforinthatRegulation.Aninitialreexam­
inationcouldtakeplaceinconjunctionwiththereview
ofbeneficiarycountriesin1996.Itshouldcentreonthe
selectioncriteriaandthedecisionprocedure.
DoneatBrussels,25February1993.
TheChairman
oftheEconomicandSocialCommittee
SusanneTIEMANN