A4-0214/98

Resolution on the Commission guidelines on priorities for the adjustment of Structural Funds programmes to the end of 1999 (C4-0640/97)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Commission guidelines (C4-0640/97),

- having regard to the EU Treaty, in particular Article B thereof, and the EC Treaty, in particular Article 130a and following articles thereof,

- having regard to the first triennal report on economic and social cohesion (COM(96)0542 - C4-0016/97),

- having regard to the proposals on economic and social cohesion set out in the Commission's 'Agenda 2000: for a stronger and wider union' (COM(97)2000),

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Policy and the opinion of the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A4-0214/98)

A. whereas the EU Treaty makes the strengthening of social and economic cohesion a priority of the Union¨s strategy over the coming years,

B. whereas the reduction of regional disparities remains the main objective of economic and social cohesion policy; whereas it must encourage healthy competition amongst the regions rather than a levelling down,

C. whereas enhancing economic competitiveness, sustainable development and creating stable employment remain as the main priorities of the Union's structural policies,

D. whereas horizontal themes such as employment, environment, equal opportunities and rural and coastal development continue to play an important role in the Structural Funds,

E. whereas the guidelines on the priorities of Structural Fund programmes can provide a theoretical or intellectual base to increase common understanding of the role of the Structural Funds and a way of promoting a broad regional policy as a whole,

F. whereas it is not the intention of the Commission to touch projects already underway,

1. Welcomes the fact that the Commission guidelines, which indicate the aims as well as the European dimension of structural policies, will help in setting and adjusting priorities for Structural Funds programmes; recognises the fact that overall priorities can and will develop during the programming period;

2. Considers that with the help of producing guidelines, the adjustments in priorities can be incorporated in the programming in a transparent way without causing delays; notes that setting the guidelines ensures that the Commission thinking is made explicit, but considers that priorities may also change at local and national level as well as at European level; suggests the annual reports could be used as a dialogue to register such changes from the bottom up;

3. Considers that the guidelines should aim at promoting sustainable development, based on the integration of ecological, economic and social policies;

4. Considers that the guidelines should be seen as a mechanism for exchange of best practice between all partners at regional, national and European level, in order to promote coherence, effectiveness, innovation and value for money in the programmes; considers that the guidelines should concentrate on European-wide themes and priorities;

5. Suggests that the guidelines might be most effective as an advisory instrument; is concerned that, under Article 9(4) of the draft Structural Fund Regulation, they appear to be a legally binding instrument; therefore calls on the Council for this to be amended or for the full rights of Parliament to be respected under Article 130d of the Treaty;

6. Points to the need to strike a balance between policies to preserve and create jobs and other Union economic policies in order to resolve the relatively frequent cases in which the two are at odds;

7. Points out that the guidelines published were thematic and avoided using specific targets, figures or quotas; considers that an output-driven approach needs to be avoided with an emphasis on the quality of programmes and of results; notes, however, that without a clear definition of quantitative indicators it will not be possible to have a serious evaluation of the progress made in horizontal policy fields such as the employment, equal opportunities and environmental impact;

8. Regrets that the social economy and new sources of employment are under-emphasised in the guidelines presented by the Commission;

9. Notes that specific social and employment priorities such as equal opportunities are observed to a greater extent under the ESF than under the other Funds and consequently calls for the general guidelines laid down to apply to all the Funds;

10. Calls on the Commission to submit the specific guidelines for the Structural Funds in a single document before the programming begins, both in relation to the presentation of plans by Member States and before the mid-term review of programmes; recommends that the guidelines be published preferably nine to a minimum of six months prior to the submission date for programmes; calls on the Commission to agree its new guidelines by 31 December 1998 in view of the next programming period;

11. Considers that the appropriate level of diversity and flexibility regarding the guidelines can best be achieved through negotiation of programming documents, where local needs are assessed by means of a large partnership process; considers that the guidelines should be aimed at those responsible for implementing projects at local level;

12. Calls on the Commission to provide guidelines on Structural Funds priorities which are clear, concise, comprehensible and reader-friendly; suggests that there should be no references to additional documents and that a check-list of no longer than one page summarising the key questions for users should be included in the guidelines;

13. Stresses that the dissemination of the guidelines has to be efficient; considers that they should be distributed through channels other than the Official Journal as well, namely via the Commission's offices in the Member States, the network of Brussels offices, and via the Europa website; suggests that the guidelines could be annexed to the application forms used in Member States;

14. Calls on the Commission to provide regions with technical seminars and training sessions to explain the guidelines;

15. Calls on the Commission to provide regions with sufficient guidance and information on use of loans, state aid rules and public-private partnerships including social partners;

16. Stresses that more emphasis must be placed on the effective completion of current programmes, avoiding delays in payments and ensuring maximum continuity; suggests that the new monitoring committees should be authorised to oversee the closure of programmes from the previous period within their region and that appropriation transfers are allowed following the formal date of closure, especially in favour of local development initiatives and voluntary organisations;

17. Suggests that the guidelines should include strategies for continuation from one programming period to another for regions that remain eligible for aid as well as for regions that become subject to transitional measures, and exit strategies for regions which lose their eligibility;

18. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.