Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on 'The proposal for a Council Decision amending Decision 93/246/EEC of 29 April 1993 adopting the second phase of the Trans-European cooperation scheme for higher education (Tempus II 1994-1998)` (97/C 34/10)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

Having regard to the Commission proposal to the Council (COM(96) 198 final - 96/0133 (CNS) ();

Having regard to the European Commission's decision of 20 May 1995 to consult the Committee of the Regions, in accordance with Article 198C, first paragraph of the Treaty on the European Union;

Having regard to its decision on 12 June 1995 to make Commission 6 - Education and Training responsible for preparing this Opinion;

Having regard to the Draft Opinion adopted by Commission 6 on 12 July 1996 (Rapporteur: Rosemary KcKenna) (CdR 193/96 rev.);

Whereas on 29 April 1993, the Council adopted the second phase of the trans-European cooperation scheme for university studies (Tempus II) for a period of four years to begin on 1 July 1994;

Whereas the Council Decision of 29 April 1993 stipulated that the Commission should evaluate the implementation of the Tempus programme and submit a proposal for the continuation or adaptation of the programme for the period beginning 1 July 1998;

Whereas the results of the evaluation confirmed the decision to adopt and further diversify the forms of assistance in line with national needs and the priorities of the systems of higher education and have shown the ability of Tempus to make an effective contribution in the partner countries to the diversification of educational opportunities and to cooperation between universities, thereby creating the right conditions for the development of scientific cultural and economic cooperation,

adopted the following Opinion unanimously at its 14th Plenary Session of 18 and 19 September 1996 (meeting of 19 September).

1. Introduction

1.1. This Opinion is directed primarily at the proposed Council Decision amending Tempus II (1994-1998) as outlined in COM(96)198 final. However, the evaluation of Tempus (COM (96)197 final) is also taken into account.

1.2. In September 1995, the COR agreed an Opinion on 'The role of local and regional authorities in education and training for Central and Eastern Europe provided through the European Union` (). This Opinion included an examination of the Tempus programme and concluded that it was an important element in the Phare programme. It also emphasised the importance and the success of the 'bottom up` approach in the Tempus programme and expressed the wish that an increasing percentage of the Phare programme could adopt this type of approach.

1.3. The Opinion also welcomed the coordinating role that the newly created European Training Foundation would play in Tempus but felt that the long term future of Tempus and its relationship with the Leonardo and Socrates programmes needed careful consideration.

1.4. The Opinion also emphasised the importance of decentralized and pluralist structures where democratic local and regional government plays an influential role in the economic and social development of Central and Eastern Europe. Much of the structure still needs to be put in place and this needs to be completed as soon as possible so that locally elected politicians can lead the local and regional debate on economic and social reform. This would involve universities, regional economic development actors, industry, teachers and trainers and ensure that economic development and training are developed in a coherent fashion. It will be an important consideration in the relationship between universities and the broader community.

2. The Importance of the Higher Education Sector in Local and Regional Communities

2.1. The higher education sector has an important role to play in the economic, social and cultural life of the regions where they are located. The evaluation of the Tempus programme stated that many projects have potential benefits outside the academic sector, particularly with business skills or applied science and technology. It also stressed the importance of links between higher education and external social and economic partners including local and regional authorities and local enterprises. The evaluation of Tempus in the Tacis countries also emphasizes the strengthening of the regional and local aspects of higher education and argues that higher education institutions are being called upon to become involved in economic and social activity including the delivery of regional development plans.

2.2. The links between higher education and democratic local and regional government are an essential element in the process of economic and social reform. It is important that democratically elected local and regional politicians lead the debate with interested parties about these reforms and that higher education is linked with the wider educational system.

2.3. The Committee of the Regions also notes that in the Tempus evaluation there was growing concern over the shortage of qualified staff in the Phare countries who are able to deal with the legal and economic aspects of national policies of reform. The development of higher education has an important role to play in the provision of suitably qualified staff.

3. The Need for a Tempus II Programme

3.1. The European Commission believes that the Tempus II programme should be extended for the 1998/99 and 1999/2000 academic years and recognizes that the restructuring of university education is an important part in the process of education and social reform in the Phare and Tacis programmes. The need for a new phase of Tempus is well argued in the evaluation of the programme (). The Committee of the Regions supports the extension of Tempus II but emphasizes that the Phare and Tacis programmes should also be used to modernize the education and training programmes so that the needs of university education are integrated into the new education and training systems.

3.2. The draft Council Decision takes into account the external evaluations of the first and second phases of Tempus and these evaluations confirmed the general suitability of the individual measures that make up the Tempus programme. Consequently, the European Commission proposes that there should be no need for a change of measures, apart from the withdrawal of mobility or support grants to students for practical placements for the associated Phare programmes. This position is supported by the Committee of the Regions.

3.3. In the explanatory memorandum which accompanies the draft Council Decision, the European Commission lists the reasons for the extension of Tempus II. This justification can be seen in the objectives and aims of the two-year extension (see paragraphs 2.1 and 2.2). Other reasons for the extension include the introduction of vocational qualifications required for a single market, the need to strengthen co-operation between higher education establishments, firms and other social and economic players and the need to provide effective support for the political initiatives of the partner countries to reform higher education. The Committee of the Regions believes that local and regional government also has a significant supporting role in these areas.

3.4. The explanatory memorandum states that it would be premature and unjustified in both political and technical terms to suspend the programme. The Committee of the Regions supports this point of view and agrees that it is important to consolidate the achievements of Tempus.

4. The objectives and priorities of Tempus II

4.1. The Committee of the Regions welcomes the redefined objectives in the Tempus II programme and the COR supports the intention to ensure that the programme dovetails into the spending priorities in the Tacis and Phare programmes.

4.2. The COR broadly welcomes the general objectives outlined in the Council Decision which are listed as:

(a) the issues concerning the development and overhaul of curricula in priority areas;

(b) the reform of the structures and establishments of higher education and their management; and

(c) the development of skills training in order to make up for the lack of skills at higher education level which are adapted to periods of economic reform, in particular by improving and increasing links with industry.

4.3. These are important objectives in the modernization of the higher education system through the Tempus programme and the COR feels that the universities have a pivotal role to play in the economic life of their regions and that university-industry links must be developed. The exchange of experience between universities through Tempus II is a key element in this strategy.

4.4. However, a close examination of these objectives shows the importance of the integration of Tempus II into Phare and Tacis. In view of these considerations, the COR welcomes the Council Decision's intention to integrate Tempus II into the national strategy of economic and social reforms for Phare and Tacis countries.

4.5. In its Opinion on EU education and training programmes in Central and Eastern Europe, the COR welcomed the fact that each national government set its own priorities in a strategy of economic reform which would be the basis of Phare activity. However, the Opinion stressed the need for the greater involvement of local and regional government in the construction of these strategies because a decentralized education and training system cannot be effectively developed without strengthening local and regional government structures. The COR maintains its position in this respect and emphasizes the involvement of local and regional government if the benefits of economic and social reform are to reach local communities. The Committee of the Regions particularly welcomes the actions in the larger Tacis countries where central government is seeking to delegate a significantly large role to local and regional authorities ().

4.6. The Committee of the Regions also welcomes the link made in the objectives with involvement of the associated countries of Central and Eastern Europe in the Socrates and Leonardo programmes. However, the introduction of Socrates and Leonardo will need careful thought because Tempus is essentially a fully EU funded assistance programme while Socrates and Leonardo are co-operation programmes with co-funding of projects shared between partners. The Erasmus strand of Socrates will be an important funding opportunity for universities but the funds for Erasmus are limited in comparison with Tempus.

5. The Implementation of the Tempus II Programme

5.1. The Committee of the Regions agrees that the situation in the Phare associated countries and non-associated Phare countries (), and in the Tacis countries is different and welcomes the different approach taken by Tempus in each group of countries.

5.2. It is important that the development of Tacis and Tempus is closely linked to the development of local and regional government in these countries. The involvement of local and regional government is particularly important in the tasks of strengthening the regional dimension of higher education and supporting higher education in its contribution to economic and social reform. Consultation is also essential in the improvement and modernization of teacher training, especially in connection with the development of pluralist civic education.

5.3. In terms of the countries participating in Phare, the European Commission argues that the Tempus programme will help prepare for accession to the European Community, make it easier to take part in the Socrates programme, manage change, and build on existing achievements. The Committee of the Regions supports these goals.

5.4. As part of the Phare and Tacis programmes, the priorities for Tempus are agreed with the interested parties from participating countries. This demand-led approach is supported by the Committee of the Regions, but it is important that the discussions about these priorities include local and regional government as well as national Ministries.

5.5. The Committee of the Regions welcomes the role of the European Training Foundation in the implementation of the programme.

5.6. The Committee of the Regions notes that Tempus offers a 100 % subsidy for its projects. In countries which are in the early stages of the restructuring process, a 100 % subsidy is important but Tempus is well advanced in a number of Phare countries and the Committee of the Regions feels that the European Commission should consider modulating the grant levels in these countries to prepare for their entry into other EU programmes where the emphasis is on co-operation rather than assistance.

5.7. The Committee of the Regions feels that there is a need to support projects and networks which will be sustainable when the Tempus funding ceases.

6. Conclusions

6.1. The Committee of the Regions warmly welcomes the draft Council Decision on the Tempus programme and the intention to continue the programme for another two academic years.

6.2. The Committee of the Regions feels that higher education has an important role to play in the economic, social and cultural life of localities and regions. In view of this role, there needs to be strong links between higher education and local and regional government. The COR would like to see greater progress towards the formation of local and regional government in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and welcomes the progress made in decentralization in the larger Tacis countries.

6.3. The introduction of a different approach between the associated CEEC countries, non-associated CEEC countries and Tacis is supported by the COR.

6.4. The Committee of the Regions strongly supports the 'bottom-up` approach of Tempus and supports the demand-led nature of Tempus whereby recipient states outline their own priorities. It is important that consultations about priorities are carried out with local and regional government as well as national Ministries.

6.5. The Committee of the Regions broadly supports the objectives of Tempus, particularly in the context of economic and social reform. In the states that are the subject of the pre-accession strategy, it is important that Tempus helps in the move from assistance to co-operation programmes, e.g. Socrates and Leonardo.

Brussels, 19 September 1996.

The Chairman of the Committee of the Regions

Pasqual MARAGALL i MIRA

() OJ No C 207, 18. 7. 1996, p. 8.

() OJ No C 100, 2. 4. 1996, p. 98.

() COM(96) 197 final.

() See COM(96)197 final, paragraph 89.

() Currently only Albania but likely to include the republics of the former Yugoslavia.