A. has democratic institutions and the following rights are
generally observed there: the right to freedom of thought, con-
science and religion, the right to freedom of expression, the
right to freedom of peaceful assembly, the right to freedom of
associations with others, including the right to form and jointrade unions and the right to take part in government directlyor through freely chosen representatives;A. has democratic structures and the following rights are
consistently observed there: the right to freedom of thought,
conscience and religion, the right to freedom of expression,
the right to freedom of peaceful assembly, the right to freedom
of associations with others, including the right to form andjoin trade unions and the right to take part in governmentdirectly or through freely chosen representatives;
European Parliament legislative resolution on the proposal for a Council directive on minimumstandards on procedures in Member States for granting and withdrawing refugee status
(COM(2000) 578  C5-0705/2000  2000/0238(CNS))
(Consultation procedure)
The European Parliament,
 having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(2000) 578) (
1),
 having been consulted by the Council pursuant to Article 67 and Article 63 of the EC Treaty
(C5-0705/2000),
 having regard to Rule 67 of its Rules of Procedure, having regard to the report of the Committee on Citizens Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home
Affairs and the opinions of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security andDefence Policy and the Committee on Womens Rights and Equal Opportunities (A5-0291/2001),
1. Approves the Commission proposal as amended;
2. Calls on the Commission to alter its proposal accordingly, pursuant to Article 250(2) of the EC
Treaty;
3. Calls on the Council to notify Parliament should it intend to depart from the text approved by
Parliament;
4. Asks to be consulted again if the Council intends to amend the Commission proposal substantially;
5. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.
(1) OJ C 62 E, 27.2.2001, p. 231.
6. Cohesion Fund (1999)
A5-0248/2001
European Parliament resolution on the Commissions Annual Report 1999 on the Cohesion Fund
(COM(2000) 822  C5-0109/2001  2001/2058(COS))
The European Parliament,
 having regard to the Commissions Annual Report 1999 (COM(2000) 822  C5-0109/2001),
 having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1164/1994 of 16 May 1994 establishing the Cohesion
Fund (1),
(1) OJ L 130, 25.5.1994, p. 1.28.3.2002 EN C 77 E/115 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 20 September 2001
TEXT PROPOSED
BY THE COMMISSIONAMENDMENTS
BY PARLIAMENT
 having regard to the Court of Auditors Annual Report covering the financial year 1999 (1),
 having regard to its resolutions of 29 June 1995 (2), 19 April 1996 (3), 26 June 1997 (4), 28 May
1998 (5), 13 April 1999 (6) and 16 June 2000 (7) on the annual reports of the Commission on the
Cohesion Fund and the cohesion financial instrument,
 having regard to its resolution of 18 January 2000 on the Sixth Periodic Report on the social and
economic situation and the development of the regions of the European Union (SEC(1999) 66 C5-0120/1999) (
8),
 having regard to Rule 47(1) of its Rules of Procedure, having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism and the
opinion of the Committee on Budgets (A5-0248/2001),
A. whereas excessive regional imbalances constitute both a political and an economic threat to the Euro-
pean Union,
B. whereas, according to Article 2 of the EC Treaty, the strengthening of economic and social cohesion
remains to be one of the main objectives of the European Union,
C. whereas in the interests of pursuing this central objective of the EU more effectively, the Maastricht
Treaty created a Cohesion Fund, referred to in Article 161 of the Treaty,
D. whereas the main aim of the Cohesion Fund was to help the countries with the greatest structural
disadvantages  currently Greece, Portugal, Spain and Ireland  to address the challenges of theintroduction and use of the single currency,
E. whereas, therefore, under the terms of the Maastricht Treaty (the annexed Protocol on economic and
social cohesion) the only conditions for access to the Cohesion Fund for a country are:
 per capita GDP less than 90 % of the Community average;
 compliance with the economic stability and convergence programmes agreed with the EU,
F. having regard to the increased importance of the Cohesion Fund owing to the fact that the Maastricht
Treaty did not provide for any economic support and adjustment mechanism in the context of econ-omic and monetary union,
G. whereas, in line with Article 158 of the EC Treaty, the Community shall develop and pursue its actions
leading to the strengthening of its economic and social cohesion in order to promote its overallharmonious development,
H. whereas, according to Article 158(2) of the EC Treaty, the Community shall aim at reducing disparities
between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favouredregions or islands, including rural areas,
I. whereas, according to Article 161 of the EC Treaty, the Cohesion Fund provides a financial contribu-
tion in the field of the environment and trans-European networks in the area of transport infrastruc-ture,
J. whereas the year 1999 marks the last year of the Cohesion Fund operations in the period 1993-1999,
(1) OJ C 342, 1.12.2000, p. 1.
(2) OJ C 183, 17.7.1995, p. 36.
(3) OJ C 141, 13.5.1996, p. 265.
(4) OJ C 222, 21.7.1997, p. 55.
(5) OJ C 195, 22.6.1998, p. 52.
(6) OJ C 219, 30.7.1999, p. 41.
(7) OJ C 67, 1.3.2001, p. 326.
(8) OJ C 304, 24.10.2000, p. 62.C 77 E/116 EN 28.3.2002 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 20 September 2001
K. whereas the effects of the Growth and Stability Pact adopted by the Council in 1998, which have
effectively restricted government investment so as to enable public accounts to be put in order, justifythe retention of the Cohesion Fund as a compensatory mechanism in order to reduce the deficitswhich have developed in most of the lower-income Member States,
L. whereas this Annual Report covers the activities of the Cohesion Fund in 1999 and provides an
overview of developments since 1993,
M. having regard to the importance of assessing projects when drawing up suitable recommendations so
that, in addition to gauging the degree of compliance at national level, the progress made towardsachieving the EUs cohesion-policy objectives can also be accurately measured,
N. whereas by the end of 1999 the Commission had committed all the financial appropriations of the
Cohesion Fund for 1999 and 91,6 % of payment appropriations had been implemented,
O. whereas the Cohesion Fund continues to play a key role in the development of the TENs within the
four beneficiary Member States (Spain, Greece, Ireland and Portugal) of the Cohesion Fund,
P. whereas Article 154(2) of the EC Treaty on trans-European networks calls for particular attention to be
given to the need to link island, landlocked and peripheral regions with the central regions of theCommunity,
Q. whereas the environmental projects under the Cohesion Fund aim at helping the beneficiary countries
to advance towards the objectives of Community environment policy,
R. whereas in 1999 the Commission tightened environmental protection requirements under two direc-
tives which affect Cohesion Fund projects (EIA and Habitats),
S. whereas the outermost regions deserve particular attention, because of their special conditions, in the
case of both the environment and transport,
T. whereas, as evidenced by the results it has achieved, the Cohesion Fund has proved to be an effective
means of cohesion,
U. whereas Parliaments repeated calls in earlier resolutions for a balance to be achieved between funding
for infrastructure and funding for the environment have been acted upon,
Activities of the Cohesion Fund in 1999
1. Welcomes the Annual Report as an essential tool in assessing the activities of the Cohesion Fund;
congratulates the Commission on the efforts made to provide an overview of results for the whole 1993-1999 period;
2. Regrets that the Commission does not provide more extensive analysis of the budgetary performance
over the period, but limits itself to a description of the actual outturn;
3. Congratulates the beneficiary Member States on complying with the goals of reducing expected
budget deficits through the convergence programmes, while sustaining a substantial level of public invest-
ment in the areas of the environment and transport;
Projects and measures adopted
4. Is aware that, in 1999, the emphasis was on the conclusion of projects rather than launching new
ones;
5. Welcomes the compliance with the aim of allocating financial resources among the beneficiary coun-
tries and notes that a balance has been struck between investment in transport infrastructure and invest-ment in the environment over 1993-1999 as a whole, despite the unevenness in the breakdown of thatbalance early in the period;28.3.2002 EN C 77 E/117 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 20 September 2001
6. Notes with satisfaction the increase in investment in rail in Greece, Spain and Portugal and likewise
the increase in investment in the area of solid waste in Portugal and in Greece;
7. Notes that indirect reference is made to the backlog in outstanding commitments remaining to be
paid at the end of period ( reste à liquider ) without either a complete quantitative description or detailed
explanations being given; this is despite the fact that reducing that backlog and speeding up implemen-tation have been a constant concern of the Budgetary Authority;
8. Confirms for the record, a backlog of some € 4 918 million at the end of 1999, of which some
€ 3 383 million remained at the end of 2000 according to the accounts;
9. Proposes to improve the process introduced for the purpose of simplifying the Cohesion Fund, in
order to prevent any further delays to the implementation of the appropriations;
10. Calls for investment in transport infrastructure to be used to help certain regions overcome the
handicaps stemming from their remoteness;
11. Calls on the Commission to carry out a study into the causes of the varying effectiveness of, and the
differing results achieved by, the Cohesion Fund in the eligible Member States;
Managing the financial assistance
12. Expresses its satisfaction at the fact that no cases of fraud were detected in 1999;13. Welcomes the fact that no cases of double financing between the Cohesion Fund and any other
Community source were detected;
14. Confirms the importance of observing the additionality principle as a key principle in the imple-
mentation of the Structural Funds;
15. Underlines the key role which Parliament should play in that process, a role which has been
neglected over the period covered by the Annual Report; believes that Parliament should not just rubber-stamp the annual allocations when it comes to adopt the budget, but should be actively involved in theevaluation process, as a guarantor of the European interest alongside the Commission;
16. Notes that the failure to use all payments appropriations available in 1999 was due to a large
number of applications for payments reaching the Commission in December 1999 and to the work-loadof the Commission services concerned at the end of the year 1999;
Monitoring, evaluation and control
17. Calls on the Commission to devote more resources to on-the-spot checks in order to detect weak-
nesses in management systems;
18. Advises the Commission to concentrate its management on a medium-term planning perspective
which would offer more guidance and continuity;
19. Calls on the Commission to apply the utmost rigour when assessing the environmental impact of
projects financed by means of the Cohesion Fund;
20. Suggests that a review and strengthening of Parliaments role is necessary, in particular to hold the
Commission and the Member States to their obligations as regards transparency in this sector, in particularas expressed in the Code of Conduct on implementation of structural policies (
1), agreed with the Commis-
sion in 1999;
21. Calls on the Commission to make significant improvements to information relating to project
assessment: instead of just checking the accounts and ensuring compliance with the immediate short-term objective, it should supply more detailed data on the contribution which projects actually make to
achieving the ultimate aim of cohesion policy, which is to reduce the development gap and the backward-
ness of certain regions, in which connection the Commission should take into account the recommen-dations made by Parliament in its abovementioned resolution of 18 January 2000;
(1) OJ C 279, 1.10.1999, p. 488.C 77 E/118 EN 28.3.2002 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 20 September 2001
Information and publicity
22. Is surprised by the fact that the Annual Report of the Cohesion Fund 1999 was published only in
January 2001; understands the efforts of the Commission to provide as complete information as possible,but nevertheless considers that a delay of over a year is not acceptable;
23. Insists on the need for a more interactive relationship to be maintained with the social partners in
connection with information tasks, so that they can be more actively involved in the search both forsolutions and for the resources which are needed if such solutions are to be put into practice;
Continued solidarity towards the cohesion countries
24. Believes that, overall, the Cohesion Fund has been effective over the period 1993-1999, and that its
creation by the Maastricht Treaty has been fully justified as a fundamental support instrument for countrieswith the greatest structural problems, with a view to preparing them for the introduction and use of thesingle currency; recalls, however, that the Cohesion Fund has not yet brought about real convergenceamong all the Member States; stresses the need for continued solidarity with the cohesion countries;
25. Emphasises the political and economic importance of diminishing economic disparities between the
current Member States and their regions, even after enlargement, since they may even worsen as a result ofthe impact and dynamics of enlargement;
26. Considers that the forthcoming enlargement is a huge challenge for solidarity in the European
Union; reminds the Commission of the crucial importance of efficient preparations for the forthcomingenlargement; considers that the Structural Instrument for Pre-Accession (ISPA) is an excellent tool forpreparing the administration at all levels for the requirements of enlargement in the structural policy field;
27. Considers that, in view of the enormous development needs of the candidate countries, proper
account needs to be taken of the absorption capacity of these countries in economic, financial and admin-istrative terms;
28. Suggests that, in the perspective of enlargement, and in light of the political choices facing the EU
as outlined in the second Report on economic and social cohesion, the quality of expenditure, the value-for-money of the different instruments, as well as the performance of the different beneficiaries, willbecome key issues in determining the future shape of the Unions cohesion strategy and the redistributive
function of its budget;
*
**
29. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission.
7. Structural Funds (1999)
A5-0247/2001
European Parliament resolution on the Commissions 11th Annual Report on the Structural Funds
(1999) (COM(2000) 698  C5-0108/2001  2001/2057(COS))
The European Parliament,
 having regard to the Commission report (COM(2000) 698  C5-0108/2001),
 having regard to Regulation (EEC) No 2081/93 of 20 July 1993 amending Regulation (EEC) No 2052/
88 on the tasks of the Structural Funds and their effectiveness and on coordination of their activities28.3.2002 EN C 77 E/119 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 20 September 2001