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
between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the other existing
financial instruments (1), and in particular Article 16 thereof, and Regulation (EEC) No 2082/93 of
20 July 1993 amending Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 laying down provisions for implementingRegulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards coordination of the activities of the different StructuralFunds between themselves and with the operations of the European Investment Bank and the otherexisting financial instruments (
2), and in particular Article 31 thereof,
 having regard to the Court of Auditors annual report for 1999 (3) submitted pursuant to Article 248
of the EC Treaty,
 having regard to the Treaty of Amsterdam and the employment conclusions of the Luxembourg
European Council,
 having regard to Agenda 2000 and to Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 of 21 June 1999 laying down
general provisions on the Structural Funds (4) and to the specific regulations governing each of the
Structural Funds,
 having regard to the conclusions of the Lisbon and Stockholm European Councils on the new econ-
omy, employment and sustainable development,
 having regard to the Commissions second report on economic and social cohesion (COM(2001) 24)
submitted pursuant to Article 159 of the EC Treaty,
 having regard to the Commissions sixth periodic report on the socio-economic situation and devel-
opment of the regions of the European Union (SEC(1999) 66  C5-0120/1999), submitted pursuantto Article 8 of Regulation (EEC) No 2083/93 of 20 July 1993 amending Regulation (EEC) No 4254/88laying down provisions for implementing Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 as regards the EuropeanRegional Development Fund (
5),
 having regard to Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 on additionality, having regard to Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty, having regard to the Commission report on measures to implement Article 299(2)  the outermost
regions of the European Union (COM(2000) 147),
 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
opinions of the Committee on Budgets, Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, Committee onFisheries and Committee on Womens Rights and Equal Opportunities (A5-0247/2001),
A. whereas 1999 was the final year of the application of the Structural Funds to seven different objec-
tives, and whereas Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 reduces the number of objectives to three, on the
understanding that each objective will be financed by a single structural fund, while the Communityinitiatives are to be reduced to four,
B. whereas in 1999 an extensive period for applying the cohesion policies and, specifically, the Structural
Funds, came to an end,
C. whereas in the 11th Annual Report on the Structural Funds (1999) the main horizontal theme is that
of measures to promote gender equality in employment,
D. whereas the contributions from the Structural Funds have been substantial for the development of the
regions, not only from the infrastructural and productive point of view but also that of social inte-gration,
(1) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993, p. 5.
(2) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993, p. 20.
(3) OJ C 342, 1.12.2000, p. 1.
(4) OJ L 161, 26.6.1999, p. 1.
(5) OJ L 193, 31.7.1993, p. 34.C 77 E/120 EN 28.3.2002 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 20 September 2001
E. whereas 1999 was the last year of the 1994-1999 programming period and saw the conclusion of the
package of measures adopted in 1992 in Edinburgh and the preparation of the framework conditionsfor the new 2000-2006 programming period,
F. whereas the reports should address the qualitative analysis and productive efficiency of the Structural
Funds, and not confine themselves to measurement of their consumption, their quantitative distribu-
tion and the transparency of their application,
G. whereas, despite the budgetary effort represented by the Edinburgh package and the progress achieved,
the EU still exhibits major regional asymmetries in economic and social development, and whereasthere are still disparities in the European Union between the periphery (including the outermostregions) and the centre,
H. whereas the average per capita income of the 10 % of the population living in the Unions most
prosperous regions is still 2,6 times higher than that of the 10 % living in the least-favoured regions,while the gap between the single richest and the single poorest region shows a ratio of 4:4,
I. whereas, despite the aims underlying the creation and application of the Structural Funds, the correc-
tion of economic and social inequalities is having more impact at Member State than at regional level;
whereas regional asymmetries have actually increased within some Member States,
J. whereas there are signs of variations in income per inhabitant, particularly in the area of employment,
K. whereas, following the two most recent programming periods, unemployment rates in the Member
States which are the main beneficiaries of the Structural Funds have, with the notable exceptions ofIreland and Portugal, kept to the levels of 1988,
L. whereas women are especially adversely affected by unemployment and low employment rates,
M. whereas the Lisbon Council adopted full employment as a major objective of the Union, and set
targets for 2010 of 70 % in the employment rate as a whole (as against the current 62 %) and 60 %for the employment rate for women (as against 52,5 %); whereas the horizontal objective of genderequality has been taken into account only partially, and policies still tend to be presented as gender-neutral,
N. whereas the average wage differential between women and men in the EU is still extremely high (28 %),
O. having regard to the existing global relationship between lower income per inhabitant, overall unem-
ployment and female unemployment,
P. whereas the persistence of inequality as regards the male and female employment rates is also related
to problems in the family and labour spheres: the domestic division of labour, the availability ofcrŁches, childrens and maternity allowances and occupational promotion factors; whereas, however,circumstances vary greatly from one Member State to another,
Q. whereas, while education and training in new technology constitutes a factor of development, social
and economic equality in the regional context remains a necessary condition for the operation ofhorizontal programmes for job creation, technical and vocational training and gender equality inemployment,
R. whereas the fact that the freedom of movement of workers constitutes a right inherent in European
citizenship cannot be used to justify the validity or fairness of labour mobility as a strategy to balancesupply and demand in employment in the EU, a strategy whose paradoxical result is that the mosthighly qualified people in the less prosperous regions and countries migrate to the more prosperouscountries,28.3.2002 EN C 77 E/121 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 20 September 2001
S. whereas it is essential to pursue socio-economic policies to reverse the trend towards the concen-
tration of economic activity, employment and population in the most central and urbanised regionsof the Union,
T. whereas the factors of remoteness and insularity that are features of the remote, outermost and insular
regions can be compensated by the development of activities financed by the Structural Funds, toincrease the competitiveness of the value-added sector, facilitate access to information and define therole of these regions in the context of an enlarged European Union,
U. whereas the entire territory of Europe, including the outermost regions, must be included in the trans-
European networks,
V. whereas the budget for cohesion policy, the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund for the EU of 15,
as a percentage of total GDP, will be reduced for the period 2000-2006, from 0,46 % in 1999 to aproposed level of 0,31 % in 2006, i.e. to no higher than the 1994 level,
W. whereas with the enlargement to take in new member states internal regional inequality could reach
an unprecedented level; whereas particularly acute problems could arise concerning unemployment, ashas already occurred with the integration of the two German economies,
X. whereas Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 states that the Member States are obliged to respect the
principle of additionality when implementing projects cofinanced from the Structural Funds and thatEU funding cannot replace structural expenditure or its equivalent by the Member States themselves;whereas over the 1994-1999 programming period not all the Member States provided the obligatoryinformation on compliance with the principle of additionality,
Y. whereas the risk exists that economic and budgetary stability programmes could result in cutbacks in
public investment, notably in transport infrastructure and R & D in the less-favoured regions; whereasit would be most unfortunate if such practices were followed by Member States which are benefici-aries of the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund, since they are precisely the ones that most needsuch investment; whereas particular care must be taken to ensure that Member States zero budgetdeficit policies do not jeopardise the principle of additionality,
Z. whereas the sound and efficient implementation of the Structural Funds, guaranteed by suitable assess-
ment and monitoring systems, is absolutely crucial for the credibility and effectiveness of the Com-
munity institutions,
Execution of the budget
1. Notes that, over the period 1994-1999, 99 % of commitment appropriations under the Structural
Funds were utilised, and that ultimately only the considerable sums transferred in 2000 and the use oftransversal financing permitted a satisfactory conclusion for the package of measures adopted in Edin-burgh;
2. Acknowledges the efforts of the Commission, in the Annual Report for 1999, also to provide an
overview of results for the whole 1994-1999 period; regrets that the Commission does not provide moreextensive analysis of the budgetary performance over the period, but limits itself to a description of the
actual out-turn;
3. Notes that indirect reference is made to the backlog of outstanding commitments remaining to be
paid at the end of the period ( reste à liquider ) (RAL) without either a complete quantitative description or
detailed explanations being given; this is despite the fact that reducing that backlog and speeding upimplementation have been recurrent objectives of each successive revision of the Structural Funds regu-lations, and a constant concern of the Budgetary Authority;C 77 E/122 EN 28.3.2002 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 20 September 2001
4. Confirms for the record a backlog of some € 41 600 million at the end of 1999, of which some
€ 21 860 million remained at the end of 2000 according to the accounts; recalls that payments can bemade on outstanding commitments from the 1994-1999 period until the end of 2001;
5. Criticises the fact that the RAL grew further in the period 1994-1999 and calls on the Commission
to reverse this trend at once;
6. Considers that the appropriations of € 160 million allocated by the Commission at the end of 1999
which were not covered in the budget should have been treated as a transfer of appropriations, and that
appropriations for innovative activities should not have been cut to cover the shortfall; urges the Commis-sion to ensure that the appropriations for innovative activities are restored to their agreed level at Berlin;
7. Welcomes the fact that outstanding appropriations from previous programming periods were sub-
stantially reduced in 1999; regrets, however, the fact that there are still outstanding appropriations fromthe period prior to 1989, i.e. some 11 years after the end of the programming period; welcomes the factthat the rules on decommitment of appropriations for the programming period 2000-2006 will preventsuch backlogs from occurring in future;
8. Notes the absence of clear guidelines concerning utilisation in respect of the Community initiatives,
with an excessive dispersal of measures;
9. Notes that, during the last programming period (1994-1999) projects were delayed and accumulated
at the end of the period, which in turn slowed down the launching of projects for the following program-ming period (2000-2006); considers that it would be to everyones advantage for the implementation ofprojects to be spread as evenly as possible over the programming period;
10. Points out that the level of commitments does not properly reflect actual implementation of
measures, especially as a significant proportion of commitments were not entered into until directly beforethe end of the programming period; expresses its concern, in particular, at the slow implementation ofCommunity Initiatives, given that only just over half of appropriations available for the 1994-1999 pro-gramming period have been paid, making the programmes more difficult and costly to implement bythose responsible for them, namely local authorities, NGOs, and the like;
11. Calls for the Funds to have as a policy priority and effect the incorporation of small businesses
(creation, expansion, technological equipment, development and innovation, internationalisation of mar-kets etc.) by their inclusion in all priority projects of the Community Support Frameworks and their sub-stantial participation in the take-up of such funds;
12. Takes the view that the recent reform of the Structural Funds is likely to significantly improve
programming, implementation and financial implementation of operations; calls on the Commission toassist the national authorities in adjusting to the new regulations by means of an active information policy;
13. Welcomes the Commissions approach involving linking programming and evaluation more closely
together; regrets, however, the fact that, when programming is being carried out, the final evaluation of
previous programmes is generally not yet available;
14. Proposes that there be an improvement in the process introduced to simplify the Structural Funds,
objectives and Community initiatives, in order to increasingly concentrate assistance in areas whose devel-opment is lagging behind and prevent further delays, of the kind observed to date, in the implementationof appropriations;
Employment
15. Calls on the Member States to continue with the employment policy process launched in Amster-
dam;
16. Stresses the need to move towards a joint regional development and employment policy;28.3.2002 EN C 77 E/123 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 20 September 2001
17. Calls on the Commission to orientate the joint implementation of the Structural Funds and the
Cohesion Fund in the interests of internal regional equality in the beneficiary states, and to carry out afull analysis of their effectiveness;
18. Takes the view that coordination between Structural Fund operations and national action plans for
employment needs to be improved;
Gender equality
19. Welcomes the Commissions initiative to present measures to promote equal opportunities for men
and women as the special theme for its annual report for 1999; takes the view, however, that the report inquestion fails to provide specific details either on access for women to the Structural Funds or on theimpact of assistance under the Community Initiatives, including the NOW Programme, on the situationof women on the labour market and the promotion of equal opportunities, details which, supported by
figures, ought to make it possible to weigh up the effectiveness of the measures pursued in this regard;
20. Calls for an integrated policy to promote womens interests, considering that the horizontal objec-
tive of gender equality has only partly been taken into account so far, linking the target of 60 % female
employment by 2010 to the implementation of the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund;
21. Calls for special measures to deal with the large problem of insecure employment, and particularly
womens employment;
22. Calls for the implementation of general measures in support of women in order to encourage
solutions to the problems related to work and family life;
23. Welcomes the Commissions decision to take steps in future to foster the principle of equal oppor-
tunities laid down in Articles 2 and 141 of the EC Treaty as amended by the Treaty of Amsterdam, incor-porate the gender aspect into policy as a whole, and work at Community level for the adoption of hori-zontal affirmative action measures;
24. Notes that, in accordance with the new regulations on the Structural Funds for 2000-2006, which
establish the mainstreaming of equal opportunities for women and men in the Funds as a priority aim,Member States are obliged to conduct an ex ante evaluation of the plans to be drawn up, establish selection
criteria for projects and use indicators in monitoring assistance from the point of view of gender equality;notes accordingly that the monitoring indicators and statistics ought to be broken down by gender;
25. Calls on the Commission to ensure that henceforth its annual reports on the Structural Funds
provide a breakdown by gender of data regarding the impact of assistance on the integration of womenand men into the labour market, on education and vocational training, on the establishment of women inbusiness and on the reconciliation of family and working life;
Enlargement
26. Calls for an immediate start to be made on the determination, on the basis of consultation which
should be as wide as possible, of cohesion policy for the period after 2006, with a view to ensuring bothcontinued support for the sectors and regions of the current Member States which will continue to beeligible in an enlarged Union, and specific supplementary cohesion arrangements for the new MemberStates;
27. 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 (COM(2001) 24), the quality of expen-diture, the value-for-money of the different objectives and funds, the need for new Member States todevelop their economies and societies, 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 redistributivefunction of its budget;C 77 E/124 EN 28.3.2002 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 20 September 2001
Agriculture and fisheries
28. Insists that the CAP and the CFP must be redefined as fundamental elements of the Unions policy
for regional equality, social cohesion and sustainable development;
29. Calls on the Commission to submit a detailed report to Parliament and the Council in 2002 on the
operations financed under the Structural Funds implemented in the Unions fisheries sector in the period
from 1994 to 1999, together with a study on the socio-economic situation in the Unions fishing regions;
Other policies
30. Calls on the Commission and the Council, with a view to the period 2007-2010, to give priority in
the context of TEN to linking the peripheral, insular and underdeveloped regions to the whole territory ofthe Union, without facing cutbacks in public investment in the Member States concerned; urges moreoverthat for the new period priority be given to the development of intermodal and sustainable transport;
31. Calls on the Commission to take account, in the interest of economic and social cohesion, of the
ultraperipheral nature of the overseas countries and territories, Madeira, the Azores and Canaries whensafeguarding access to the Structural Funds after 2006;
32. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to act over the coming years in accordance with
the philosophy of the Structural Fund regulations as regards environmental mainstreaming in respect of all
of the Funds objectives;
33. Calls on the Member States to honour their undertakings under the Natura 2000 directive;34. Notes the adoption of the specific programmes under the fifth framework programme for RTD, as
well as the preparation in 1999 of the communication Towards a European research area, in which it isproposed to strengthen the role of the regions in the European research effort and, in particular, in theconstruction of the European research area;
Additionality
35. Is dismayed that the principle of additionality, one of the four basic principles underlying the
Structural Funds, is evidently not being fully complied with by the Member States and the Commission;
regrets the fact that no penalty can be imposed when Member States infringe the additionality principle;
calls on the Commission, when carrying out ex-ante reviews in connection with programming, to placeparticular emphasis on compliance with the additionality principle; agrees, furthermore, with the recom-mendation of the Court of Auditors that, for the new programming period, procedures for verifying addi-tionality should be drawn up that are more workable, that are integrated into the programming, moni-toring and evaluation frameworks and that are suitable for use with the budgetary and statisticalinformation available;
36. Calls on the Member States to comply strictly with the principle of additionality and asks the
Commission to act to create instruments and rules ensuring that additionality is applied;
37. Calls on the Commission to supply Parliament as soon as possible with a list of the measures it
intends to apply to ensure compliance with this principle, in particular where Member States which arebeneficiaries of the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund operate a zero budget deficit rule;
38. Calls for the regions, and not the Member States, to administer the Structural Fund projects imple-
mented within their territorial ambit;
Partnership
39. Urges the Commission and the Member States, in their management of the Structural Funds, to
apply the principle of partnership with economic and social agents and the principle of subsidiarity, andto recognise the competences of the Member States internal political units;28.3.2002 EN C 77 E/125 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 20 September 2001
Evaluation and control
40. Welcomes the Commissions inclusion, for the first time in an annual report, of a chapter on the
means of assessment and verification applied, in response to the criticisms made by Parliament in previousyears;
41. Notes that the irregularities and cases of fraud reported by the Member States in 1999 involved
an amount of € 120,6 million, in other words 0,39 % of the total Structural Fund appropriations(€ 30,6 billion); calls on the Commission to strengthen on-the-spot checks by the appropriate inspectionbodies; requests the Commission to provide regular information on the steps taken to combat irregularitiesin European Structural Fund operations in the Member States;
42. Notes the detailed rules laid down in Regulations (EC) Nos 438/2001 (
1) and 448/2001 (2) for the
purposes of implementing Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999; welcomes the improvements brought about infinancial control regarding the Structural Funds; calls for the above Regulations to be applied comprehen-
sively by the Member States and the Commission; calls on the Member States to improve the management
and control systems designed to prevent, uncover, and remedy weak spots and systematic irregularities;calls on Member States which have not yet done so to give full powers to their national audit institutionsto check the use made of EU resources at every level up to the final recipients;
43. Underlines the key role which the European Parliament should play in the process of evaluation and
control, a role which has been neglected over the period covered by the Annual Report; believes that theParliament should not just rubber-stamp the annual allocations when it comes to adopt the budget, butshould be actively involved in the evaluation process, as a guarantor of the European interest alongside theCommission;
44. Suggests that a review and strengthening of the role 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,notably as expressed in the Code of Conduct on implementation of structural policies agreed with theCommission in 1999;
*
**
45. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission and the Parlia-
ments of the Member States.
(1) OJ L 63, 3.3.2001, p. 21.
(2) OJ L 64, 6.3.2001, p. 13.
8. Female genital mutilation
A5-0285/2001
European Parliament resolution on female genital mutilation (2001/2035(INI))
The European Parliament,
 having regard to the motion for a resolution of 26 February 2001 by Maurizio Turco and others on
female genital mutilation (B5-0686/2000/rev.), signed by 317 Members of the European Parliament,
 having regard to Articles 2, 3 and 5 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted in 1948,
 having regard to Articles 2, 3 and 26 of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and
Political Rights, adopted in 1966,
 having regard to Articles 2, 3 and 12 of the United Nations International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights, adopted in 1966,C 77 E/126 EN 28.3.2002 Official Journal of the European Communities
Thursday 20 September 2001