WRITTEN QUESTION E-3858/00

by Daniel Varela Suanzes-Carpegna (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(8 December 2000)

Subject: Enlargement and regional policy: European territorial strategy (ETS)

After two years of negotiations with the applicant countries in the Luxembourg Group (Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic, Slovenia, Estonia and Cyprus) talks started last April on the application of the acquis of the structural funds (Chapter 21 of the negotiations) with the six countries in that group. In this context the European Parliament adopted a resolution in October this year (R5-0417/2000(1) of 4 October 2000) on the enlargement of the European Union, setting out the EP's requests with regard to the accession procedure and the negotiations being held on the subject.

Could the Commission indicate the approximate timetable for the debate on Chapter 21 and the stage reached in the negotiations and the progress made so far? Can it say roughly when it envisages starting the debate on Chapter 21 with the applicant countries in the Helsinki Group (Romania, Slovakia, Latvia, Lithuania, Bulgaria and Malta) in the context of the accession negotiations which began on 28 March this year?

In paragraph 109 of the EP's resolution on the enlargement of the EU Parliament considers that the European Spatial Development Perspective must be taken into account during the enlargement process, in a manner consistent with the subsidiarity principle, and tied clearly to regional policy, with a view to the reform of the Structural Funds in 2006, in order to provide an adequate response to the development needs of the enlarged Union, and calls on the Commission, in this connection, to analyse the impact of the enlargements on employment, cohesion and economic migration with a view to taking prompt measures to prevent the emergence of regional imbalances;.

Can the Commission say to what extent it is taking this request into account in the accession procedure and its negotiations with the Luxembourg Group in the context of Chapter 21, particularly as regards the ETS?

How will the ETS promote the economic, social and territorial cohesion of the outer maritime regions currently under Objective 1 by combating the increase in the peripheral nature of these regions which enlargement will entail?

(1) 'Texts adopted' of 4 October 2000, p. 1.

Answer given by Mr Verheugen on behalf of the Commission

(28 February 2001)

It is not possible at this stage to provide a reliable timetable leading to the closure of the negotiations on chapter 21. The state of preparation, for example, in terms of the development of administrative capacity varies considerably between candidate countries. The differing situations are reflected in the regular reports, the most recent of which was adopted by the Commission on 8 November 2000(1).

The obligation to implement the acquis is an absolute requirement in order that the candidate countries are able on accession to absorb the allocated budget on the basis of the rules governing the implementation of the structural funds and the cohesion fund.

With regard to the Helsinki group referred to by the Honourable Member, the Commission has received position papers from Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia and Malta and therefore it seems likely that for these countries negotiations on chapter 21 will be opened under the Swedish Presidency. For Romania and Bulgaria, it is not clear at present that negociations will be able to begin at the same time.

The debate on the future of European cohesion policy after 2006, including the role of the European Spatial Development Perspective, is only beginning. The Commission published the Second Cohesion Report on 31 January 2001(2), which sets out a number of ideas and options in this regard, in order to launch the debate. The Parliament will be fully involved in this debate. With regard to the outermost regions, the Honourable Member will be aware that the Commission has presented proposals to the Council in the fields of structural policies and rural development in order to take account of their particular circumstances(3).

(1) COM(2000) 700 final.

(2) COM(2001) 24.

(3) COM(2000) 732 final.