EN Official Journal of the European Union C 51/31

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Establishment of European territorial pacts: proposal for a revision of the tripartite contracts and agreements

(2007/C 51/06)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

HAVING REGARD TO the UK presidency's decision of 21-22 November 2005, under the first paragraph of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to consult it on the matter;

HAVING REGARD TO its Bureau's decision of 25 April 2006 to instruct the Commission for Constitutional Affairs, European Governance and the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice to draw up an opinion on the subject;

HAVING REGARD TO the conclusions of the meeting of the High Level Group on Governance and the EU, which took place in London on 21 and 22 November 2005;

HAVING REGARD TO the conclusions of the meeting of the High Level Group on Governance and the EU, which took place in Turku on 2 and 3 October 2006;

HAVING REGARD TO the contribution from the European Commission presented to the meeting of the High Level Group on Governance and the EU held in Turku;

HAVING REGARD TO the European Commission's White Paper on European Governance of 25 July 2001, COM(2001) 428 final (1);

HAVING REGARD TO the Communication from the Commission A framework for target-based tripartite contracts and agreements between the Community, the States and regional and local authorities of 11 December 2002, COM(2002) 709 final;

HAVING REGARD TO the Communication from the Commission to the European Council A citizens' agenda — Delivering results for Europe of 10 May 2006, COM(2006) 211 final;

HAVING REGARD TO its opinion (CdR 121/2005) on Better lawmaking 2004 and Better Regulation for Growth and Jobs in the European Union, adopted on 12 October 2005 (2);

HAVING REGARD TO its draft opinion (CdR 135/2006 rev. 1) adopted by the Commission for Constitutional Affairs, European Governance and the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice on 30 June 2006 (rapporteur: Mr Raymond Forni, president of the Regional Council of Franche-Comté (FR/PES));

1) WHEREAS tripartite contracts and agreements are an appropriate tool to foster multi-level governance in Europe, not least by involving local and regional authorities in the implementation of Community policies, while at the same time taking account of the institutional set-up in each Member State;

2) WHEREAS this new optional instrument of governance is calculated to secure greater flexibility, efficiency and democracy within the European Union, and thus helps boost public support for the European venture;

3) WHEREAS it has set the re-launch of tripartite contracts and agreements as one of its political priorities for 2006 and is seeking in particular to expand the role and build on the potential of this instrument in the implementation of the Lisbon strategy;

4) WHEREAS the more widespread use of tripartite contracts and conventions, which are executive planning instruments, serves to render planning policy more coherent and consistent, be it at European or local level, and to bring diversity to the instruments used in the context of consultation between all the institutions concerned with economic and social cohesion policy in the regional sphere;

5) WHEREAS the results of the experimental phase of the tripartite contracts and agreements have been mixed and the instrument itself — together with its operating arrangements, goals and scope — needs to be redefined;

6) WHEREAS at the meeting of the High Level Group on Governance and the EU on 2 and 3 October 2006, it made, in the interests of local and regional authorities, a tangible contribution to the revision of the instrument with a view to ensuring that it reaches its full potential at the meeting of the High Level Group on Governance and the EU; in the conclusions to its meeting, the High Level Group pointed out that there were no obstacles to the continued operation of the instrument; it also drew attention to the interest expressed by a number of Member States in introducing a new experimental phase, on a voluntary basis;

adopted the following opinion unanimously at its 66th plenary session, held on 11 and 12 October 2006 (meeting of 12 October):

VIEWS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

1. Promoting and enhancing the partnership principle in the workings of the European Union

The Committee of the Regions

1.1 feels that, given the economic, social, environmental and democratic challenges Europe faces, a genuine partnership is vital to bolstering — and thereby boosting the efficiency of — the activities of the European Union, the Member States and local and regional authorities;

1.2 points out that consolidating the interinstitutional partnership principle, in accordance with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality, is fundamental to building the kind of Europe that all European citizens can feel is their ‘common home’;

1.3 believes that putting the partnership principle into practice on the ground would make it possible to overcome the weaknesses of the current system and would provide real added value in attaining the joint objectives that have been well defined along the lines set out in the Citizens' agenda proposed by the Commission in its communication of 10 May 2006, without thereby affecting the institutional remits of the various stakeholders concerned;

1.4 notes, moreover, that the debate with the public currently under way in the Member States as part of the reflection period shows that it is possible to move closer to European citizens through tangible, high-profile measures, and that the direct involvement of local and regional authorities in the European venture is an essential element in this process.

2. The experimental phase of tripartite contracts and agreements: the Committee of the Regions' assessment

The Committee of the Regions

2.1 has from the outset backed the idea of tripartite contracts and agreements as a partnership-based approach for the more fluid and flexible implementation of legislation and programmes with a strong territorial impact;

2.2 observes that the results of the experimental phase of the tripartite contracts and agreements have failed to live up to its expectations, yet feels that, without challenging the relevance of this instrument per se, every possible effort must, on the contrary, be made in order to make its use more common and more widespread;

2.3 notes that, so far, just one tripartite agreement has been signed — with the Lombardy region — and laments the European Commission's lack of commitment towards signing the three other projected pilot agreements (Birmingham, Lille and Pescara), the innovative content of which could well have delivered real added value; notes in this context, new initiatives emanating from local and regional authorities (such as the Principality of Asturias and the autonomous Province of Trento) and draws attention to the measures taken by certain European and national associations with a view to bolstering and promoting the instrument;

2.4 recalls how local and regional authorities, which are to a large extent responsible for transposing and implementing EU legislation and measures, showed a great deal of interest in the idea of tripartite contracts and agreements when it was launched, as these would be a way of boosting their own efficiency; they are also a means of assisting EU institutions, national governments, and regional and local authorities in the identification and integrated implementation of their actions and activities, which would enhance the role of each institutional player;

2.5 does not, therefore, endorse the appraisal made by the European Commission to the effect that ‘no local, regional or central authority has shown itself to be particularly interested in the proposal’;

2.6 draws attention to the precarious nature of the experimental phase, which has too limited a range; after having noted the evaluation made by the European Commission feels that a revision of this instrument is all the more necessary, taking special account of the following points: — greater transparency and communication about this new instrument as part of Plan D and beyond, and, more specifically, information campaigns for those who might potentially benefit from it, i.e. local and regional authorities, and also for the Member States; — demonstrable and genuine leadership at all levels; — sound coordination of sources of funding; — renewed interest by the European Commission, which launched the initiative, in a flexible, practical instrument that is light on the public purse; — appropriate coordination within the European Commission; — sound ‘vertical’ cooperation between the various tiers of government, not least between national and regional/local level, in line with the subsidiarity principle as a ‘regulating’ factor; — organisation of the various partners involved, headed by a clearly identified ‘leader’, while respecting the powers and responsibilities of each one; — explicit mention of the instrument's added value for the European Commission, the Member States and the local and regional authorities;

2.7 draws attention to the fact that, in its resolution of December 2003, the European Parliament welcomed the instrument and expressly requested that the pilot scheme cover a sufficiently large number and variety of cases and that funding be made available to facilitate the requisite publicity;

2.8 draws attention to the replies to the questionnaire sent to the Member States by the Finnish presidency; the replies indicate that a majority of the Member States is in favour of entering into tripartite or multipartite agreements embracing Member States, regional and local authorities and the European Commission, with a view to promoting the partnership principle in the implementation of European policies;

2.9 envisages contributing to meeting the fundamental conditions set out by the European Commission to ensure the success of the instrument, by proposing several lines of approach; is, moreover, ready to act as a driving force for generating the political momentum needed to develop use of this instrument; nevertheless, stresses that no initiative can succeed without the support and commitment of the Member States concerned as well as that of the European Commission.

3. The establishment of European territorial pacts: the Committee of the Regions' recommendations

The Committee of the Regions

3.1 advocates a revision of the tripartite contracts and agreements and their redefinition as European territorial pacts so as to adapt them to the needs and interests of the various tiers of government likely to be party to them;

3.2 trusts that the European territorial pacts will make it possible to: — coordinate and synchronise, at various institutional levels, the programming, planning, decision-making, implementation and administrative processes of major EU policy objectives and projects; — deliver the EU's key political goals and priorities flexibly, effectively and on a voluntary basis through targeted partnerships that facilitate, among other things, the pursuit of cohesion policy objectives; a local-level approach to the Lisbon strategy; highly targeted communication initiatives; and local-level coordination of key European policies in areas such as transport and energy, as well as implementation of integrated policy strategies, as in the case of maritime and coastal policy; — secure the effective management of tripartite contracts and agreements as initially proposed by the European Commission so as to arrive at solutions that reflect grassroots concerns and do not require recourse to heavy and expensive legislative and/or regulatory mechanisms, and to develop partnership-based projects under the responsibility of the regions and local authorities and enjoying technical and financial support from the national and European levels. This could prove particularly useful in regions with a serious natural and/or economic and social handicap or by sparsely populated regions — such as those on the outermost fringes — where European legislation and policies may sometimes be difficult to transpose or apply;

3.3 stresses that these policy tools would, in themselves, deliver a great deal of added value both for regional and local authorities and for the European Union as they would make it possible to tailor EU activities more effectively to real local and regional needs, and would thus more readily respond to specific grassroots concerns;

3.4 affirms its willingness to work together with the European Commission, the EU presidency and the other institutions concerned, in particular with the High Level Group on Governance, to identify and assess the specific added value of such contracts and agreements by establishing appropriate yardsticks and indicators;

3.5 feels that the freedom to draw on European territorial pacts of this kind and the negotiation of such pacts on the basis of a shared commitment on the part of the various stakeholders concerned would be conducive to strengthening ongoing and regular dialogue between the three tiers of government — from drafting right up to implementation, including instances where more than one Member State might be involved. This instrument must, in any case, be designed to be fully in keeping with existing legislation, whether regional, national or European, regarding both the division of powers in each Member States and compliance with current sectoral rules or those governing the management and control of financial resources;

3.6 thinks that, in pursuit of the common objectives, there can be no genuine partnership without financial input from each of the parties to the agreement; proposes that any consideration of the funding of European territorial pacts should focus on potential synergies between (i) at European level, existing budget headings in the policy areas concerned and the Structural Funds, and (ii) budget resources available at local, regional and national level, without creating an additional Community regional policy instrument or applying for additional funding to achieve the aim in question;

3.7 considers that the common aim should be to optimise the impact of the initiative by making quite clear, at field level, the added Community value it brings. This added value becomes clear when powers to legislate for, develop or implement certain policies are spread between different public administrations (European, national, regional or local); calls on the European Commission to determine precise indicators for defining this added value;

3.8 asks the European Commission to broaden the European territorial pacts for use in other fields and other European policy areas such as the environment, and to foster their use in relation, among other things, to the Lisbon strategy, cohesion policy, major European infrastructure and maritime policy;

3.9 considers it advisable to step up consultation between the European Union, the EU Council, the European Parliament and the Committee of the Regions to develop and implement the European territorial pacts; feels, moreover, that this can only be done with the support of the national governments involved;

3.10 repeats its request to the European Commission to reinforce horizontal coordination by its secretariat-general in the management of this new tool;

3.11 proposes that regular consultation mechanisms be put in place between the various government authorities involved in a territorial pact; these mechanisms must remain flexible and involve only a limited number of staff; territorial pacts must be designed in such a way that the Commission is able to conclude them with all Member States and regional or local bodies which fulfil the established criteria and conditions, meeting the requirements of objectivity, openness and transparency. The regions undertake to cooperate with the Commission and the Member States in establishing such criteria;

3.12 considers it vital to improve interplay and information exchange between local and regional authorities who are party to territorial pacts; and proposes that provision be made for annual monitoring through yearly meetings between the government authorities involved, or through public hearings;

3.13 calls, in conclusion, on the European Commission to set in motion a genuine information campaign, coupled with awareness-raising activities, for the launch of the European territorial pacts, targeted at all potential stakeholders and clearly highlighting the purpose and political importance of the instrument;

3.14 believes it to be necessary that the definition of territorial pacts make formal reference to the importance of local social partners, who are players in local and regional development;

3.15 considers it advisable, given the important role that citizen participation should play in identifying the objectives of the European territorial pacts, that actions are carried out by the European institutions to encourage this participation as well as the implementation of proposals for instruments facilitating citizen participation;

3.16 instructs its president to forward this opinion to the Council, the European Commission, the European Parliament, Member State governments and the High Level Group on Governance and the EU.

Brussels, 12 October 2006 The President of the Committee of the Regions Michel DELEBARRE

(1) OJ C 287 of 12.10.2001, p. 1-29.

(2) OJ C 81 of 4.4.2006, p. 6-10.