Resolution on the Commission document ' Europe 2000+, Cooperation for European territorial development' (COM(94) 0354 - C4-0216/95)
Date: 1995-06-29
Institutions: Committee on Regional Development, European Parliament
Subjects: European Community, regional cooperation, regional policy













EUR-Lex - 51995IP0147 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51995IP0147

Resolution on the Commission document ' Europe 2000+, Cooperation for European territorial development' (COM(94) 0354 - C4-0216/95)  


Official Journal C 183 , 17/07/1995 P. 0039 





A4-0147/95Resolution on the Commission document 'Europe 2000+, Cooperation for European territorial development' (COM(94)0354 - C4-0216/95)The European Parliament,- having regard to the document 'Europe 2000+ Cooperation for European territorial development' (COM(94)0354 - C4-0216/95),- having regard to the Treaty on European Union, in particular Article B thereof, and to Articles 129a, 130a and 130b of the EC Treaty,- having regard to its resolutions of 15 December 1983 on a European regional planning scheme ((OJ C 10, 16.1.1984, p. 115.)), 26 October 1990 on a concerted regional planning policy ((OJ C 295, 26.11.1990, p. 652.)) and 16 September 1992 on a Community policy for regional planning: Europe 2000 ((OJ C 284, 2.11.1992, p. 75.)),- having regard to the Fifth Periodic Report on the Social and Economic Situation and Development of the Regions of the Community,- having regard to its resolution of 28 May 1993 on areas with exceptionally low population densities ((OJ C 176, 28.6.1993, p. 226.)),- having regard to the resolutions of the Council of Europe and the Committee of the Regions,- having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Policy (A4- 0147/95),A. whereas one of the fundamental objectives enshrined in the Treaty on European Union is the strengthening of economic and social cohesion, meaning above all the reduction of the disparities between the development levels of the various regions; and having regard to the mandate of the EC Treaty, which wishes to see both the economic policies of Member States and all Community policies participating in bringing about the objective of strengthening economic and social cohesion,B. whereas, according to the data contained in the Fifth Periodic Report on the Social and Economic Situation and Development of the Regions of the Community, the disparities between the various areas of the Union continue to be considerable despite the major efforts already made; whereas there are new difficulties facing the least-favoured regions during the run-up to monetary union,C. whereas the far-reaching socio-economic and political changes of recent years have taken place alongside substantial changes to the Union's geographical configuration, as a result of German unification and the accession of Finland, Sweden and Austria, against a background of new relations with the countries of Eastern Europe and the Mediterranean, all of which has resulted in a more complex and diversified regional picture,D. whereas, in an area without frontiers, there are numerous problems which go beyond the national sphere such as urban developments close to major rivers, and decisions taken by the Member States have repercussions beyond their own territory, while Community policies - particularly structural, agricultural, environmental, transport and trans-European network policies - have a considerable impact on the development of the regions of the Community, although there is no global strategy governing the way in which they are applied,E. whereas the Treaty on European Union lays down that the environmental dimension must be integrated into all Union policies; whereas the Action Programme on the Environment has established a new framework intended to ensure sustainable development, as confirmed by the strategy for recovery sketched in the White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness and Employment; whereas the environment plays an ever increasing role with regard to the attractiveness of any given area and the reasons why undertakings and population groups settle there,F. whereas in a common European area unemployment affecting millions of people cannot possibly be tolerated, and regional planning policy should back up the measures referred to in the White Paper on Growth, Competitiveness and Employment in respect to the creation of jobs,G. having regard to the work of the Council of Europe in the field of regional planning, and particularly the European Strategy and Regional Planning Charter,H. whereas the work of the informal Councils of Ministers responsible for regional planning since 1989 has resulted in the Commission's drawing up the strategic documents 'Europe 2000' and 'Europe 2000+' and in the setting up of the Spatial Development Committee for permanent consultation and cooperation between the Member States,I. whereas the Spatial Development Committee and the Commission have been instructed to draw up the European Spatial Development Perspective, which is intended to be the political and operational follow-through of the analyses contained in 'Europe 2000+',J. having regard to its own repeated calls for a Community regional planning policy to be developed,K. whereas European competitiveness can be improved only by greater efforts in the fields of research and technology transfer; whereas the least-developed regions also suffer from major deficits in these areas; and whereas scientific and technical know-how has become a decisive production factor, which means that a 'know-how society' must be introduced on a Europe-wide basis,L. having regard to the excellent quality of the work embodied in the document 'Europe 2000+: Cooperation for European territorial development', which demonstrates that in regional terms, the trend of European development is one in which disparities are becoming increasingly diversified, and highlights once again the fact that balanced and lasting development of the Union will require a Community regional planning policy at the service of economic and social cohesion,M. whereas the economic and social cohesion objectives established by the Maastricht Treaty will be all the more difficult to achieve in certain areas of the European Union because of the geographical or human constraints with which they are burdened, such as isolated or remote mountain or seaboard regions, thinly-populated rural areas, the regions of Europe's Arctic North, or all of the island regions, where one or several of the aforementioned factors exacerbate the permanent disadvantages caused by their island status,N. having regard to the continuing validity of the demands made in its opinion on the document 'Europe 2000',O. whereas since the document 'Europe 2000+: Cooperation for European territorial development' was drafted, the Union has been enlarged to include the new Member States, which requires adaptation of the document to take account of this,1. Believes that it is imperative that the Treaty, when it is reviewed in 1996, should incorporate the wherewithal to develop a European regional planning policy on a European scale, and in particular to:(a) make possible the joint adoption of guidelines guaranteeing that the various Community Policies are coherent with and complementary to the objective of balanced and lasting development of the Union's regions by strengthening their economic and social cohesion,(b) strengthen the trans-European network policy, extending it to cover education and vocational training, research and the environment,(c) include a legal framework which will facilitate trans-frontier and inter-regional cooperation,(d) contribute towards the gradual enlargement of the EU,and calls on the Commission and the Council to provide to Parliament, in good time, specific information on any possible inclusion of European regional policy in the Treaty, in order that Parliament's relevant committee may subject the proposals to thorough analysis;Regional planning as a cohesion instrument2. Believes that regional planning must be viewed above all as an instrument for combating disparities between the Union's various regions, as the EC Treaty implies, providing as it does in Article 130b that Member States shall conduct and coordinate their economic policies in such a way as to strengthen cohesion, and laying down that all Community Policies shall take into account and contribute to the achievement of this objective;3. Believes that regional planning at European level should rely primarily on the regional structuring role which Community financial instruments play and that regional planning should seek to improve and make better use of the action and effectiveness of the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund and the programmes to develop the so-called soft factors (culture, education, etc.);4. Believes that a viable 'European area' implies a longterm strategy for conserving Europe's natural and cultural heritage, integral to the concept of sustainable development;5. Calls for the strategy for conserving Europe's natural heritage to lay particular stress on the reafforestation of many areas of the Union, thus forging a solid link between employment policy and sustainable development;6. Recognizes the decisive role of water resources, infrastructure, agriculture, forestry and tourism in the sphere of regional planning;7. Agrees with the Commission when it states that area planning is a necessary pre-condition for recovering and maintaining the Union's global competitiveness, but insists, in particular, that it is also essential to ensure the competitiveness of the various regions if equality of opportunity is to be upheld, which means guaranteeing the different regions access to equipment and infrastructure on an equitable basis;8. Calls on the Commission to take account of recent developments in trans- European transport infrastructure planning (trans-European transport networks) in future studies on European area planning and, in particular, to evaluate in greater detail their impact on the peripheral and often structurally weak maritime regions;9. Welcomes the analysis of the role of public funding begun in 'Europe 2000+' and calls on the Commission to sharpen this focus so as to quantify the horizontal policies involved in regional planning, particularly when developing an indicator which will summarize the contribution made by public funding to per capita income in each region, with regard to specific indicators such as population density, economy, infrastructure and levels of environmental protection, and identifying the amount being assigned to horizontal regional planning policies; regrets the absence, in the chapter concerning the territorial impact of public funding, of any analysis of the role of public services, insofar as the disappearance of the redistributive effects of public utility services could still further weaken peripheral regions and less-favoured areas; believes that consideration should be given to the establishment of a monitoring procedure which would enable the Union's regional policy to be scrutinized effectively within proper administrative boundaries and which could be used to monitor the influence on employment of the regional and economic policies pursued by the Union and its Member States, particularly in the less developed regions;10. Stresses moreover that the territory of the European Union includes the so- called 'outermost' regions which, due to their very special characteristics, particularly their extreme remoteness from the European continent, can only envisage European regional planning policy in very different terms from the rest of the Union;11. Emphasizes the need for supra-regional planning to protect and conserve scarce water resources; reiterates the need to create a cross-border network of water protection zones and to conserve and strengthen regional water cycles; calls for appropriate measures to reduce water consumption and improve water quality;The principle of subsidiarity. Working methods12. Notes that the political and administrative powers affecting regional planning and development fall within the competence both of the Union and the Member States on the one hand, and of regional and local authorities on the other; recommends that the principle of subsidiarity be scrupulously observed and that the drawing up of Community guidelines for a European regional planning policy in this area involve close collaboration between all the institutional authorities concerned;13. Believes that cooperation and exchange of information, based on common Europe-wide indicators defined in equal terms, should constitute the principal working methods deployed in area planning;14. Welcomes the progress made at institutional level in recent years, but believes that it is imperative that:(a) the Councils of Ministers responsible for regional planning be given official status,(b) the Spatial Development Committee be given permanent status,(c) more rapid progress be achieved in setting up the European Observatory,(d) the European area framework concept constantly be adapted to changing conditions,(e) in this process of institutional reinforcement of European regional planning policy, care should be taken to ensure an appropriate involvement of regional and local operators, equipped with development or land use planning powers, whether advisory or, where appropriate, directly participatory;15. Urges the Commission and the Spatial Development Committee to complete their work on the Spatial Development Perspective as a matter of urgency, and in future to supplement it with an annual Spatial Planning Report, requests them to take account of this resolution, and reserves the right to deliver an opinion on the documents in question;16. Supports the continuity of the Commission's initiatives in the field of regional planning, particularly within the framework of Article 10 of the ERDF Regulation; also considers the work of the Commission on developing information systems, in particular the Geographical Information System (GIS) coordinated by Eurostat, to be of major interest;17. Calls on the Commission and Council to brief Parliament as promptly as possible on the new total permitted financial amounts for European area planning policy (pilot projects under Article 10 of the ERDF Regulation, extension and augmentation of the INTERREG Community initiative) so that it has sufficient time, as an equal arm of the budgetary authority, to formulate its opinion on these measures;18. Believes that it is essential, particularly in view of the changes which have taken place in the Union's make-up and geopolitical situation, that collaboration on regional planning with the Council of Europe should continue;19. Calls on the Commission and the Spatial Development Committee, in view of the probable accession to the European Union of Cyprus and Malta and the associated countries of Central and Eastern Europe, and given the long-term character of any area planning policy, to begin forthwith to lay down the parameters for an enlarged Union in its elaboration of an area development plan, so as to counteract in good time foreseeable problems concerning the integration of these countries; therefore views as desirable cooperation between the European Union and the applicant countries on the basis of consultation and coordination in the field of area planning;Scope of action to be taken20. Repeats that it is convinced of the need for a long-term strategy to restore a new geographical equilibrium in Europe, and believes that an integrated approach is required in searching for solutions to problems which are profoundly interrelated; no solution to the problems of urban areas should overlook the role of rural areas, nor should the problems of congestion receive preferential treatment at the expense of the problems of geographical isolation with regard to the provision of adequate transport links; any attempt at a solution must seek to combine working and residential facilities, facilities for trade and provision of services, and to set up restorative zones and ensure environmental improvement, taking due account of the social implications of distribution and re-distribution processes;21. Considers that the role of the trans-European networks in regional planning is fundamental and consequently that there is an urgent need to supplement the transport and energy guidelines and to launch the information society while maintaining the criterion of universal service; agrees with the Commission on the need to supplement the major networks with secondary networks and points to the role which funding from the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund must play in this regard - something which entails satisfactory coordination;22. Expresses its concern at the risk that, for the sake of immediate profitability, the networks will serve to accentuate imbalances by giving preference to central areas suffering from congestion as against the need to provide isolated areas with connections and, in this respect, points to the priorities laid down in Article 129b of the EC Treaty;23. Believes that the trans-European information networks need to be established and extended in such a way as to allow the creation of job opportunities in rural areas in such advanced sectors as informatics, services and technology as soon as possible;24. Stresses once again the need for the public transport network, particularly for environmentally-friendly forms of transport, to be given priority over private transport;25. Believes that the trans-European network projects should not be carried out at the expense of the environment;26. Considers that the preservation, stabilization and development of rural areas, which are threatened, particularly in some regions, by a definite risk of desertification and depopulation, are essential not only in terms of the Union's regional balance and the conservation of Europe's natural and cultural heritage, but also in social terms; considers that analyses of the impact which CAP developments may have in these areas must be taken further;27. Considers that urban and rural problems cannot be tackled separately and accordingly approves the strategy advocated by the Commission for giving priority to the development of small and medium-sized towns, which can at the same time stimulate surrounding rural areas, and to encouraging the decentralization of economic activities, thus helping to alleviate the problems of congestion in big cities;28. Is aware that the major urban agglomerations face urgent problems in terms of congestion, environmental degradation and social exclusion; voices its concern at the growing competition between major agglomerations to attract economic activities, which can only make the problems worse; favours an approach which gives priority to cooperation between cities and their regional integration and supports the strategy referred to by the Commission as regards encouraging a polycentric urban system, while respecting, in any event, the diversity of urban development models in the different Member States;29. Warns that the integration of outlying areas in the Union's economic structure represents the hardest challenge for regional planners, reaffirms in this connection that fair access to infrastructures must, in any case, be ensured so as to preserve equality of opportunity and points out that ending the isolation of outlying areas is one of the priorities laid down in the Treaty as regards the development of trans-European networks;30. Points out that the outermost regions defined in Declaration No 26 annexed to the Final Act of the Treaty on European Union are remote or island regions, a fact which justifies their receiving special attention which should be reflected in a special legal status within the Union;31. Calls on the Commission, in forthcoming documents, to include the outermost regions as an integral part of its consideration of specific areas (section B) on the same basis as urban and rural areas and border regions, and not to continue to relegate them to an annex;32. Considers that cross-border cooperation experiments are of the greatest interest and calls on the Member States to develop this type of cooperation; accordingly, the INTERREG II Programme must be made as effective as possible, thus making it easier, from a political and legal viewpoint, to have permanent cooperation structures at the Union's internal and external borders;33. Urges the incorporation of cross-border cooperation as part of the cooperation between the Union and the CIS countries and its inclusion in the forthcoming TACIS programme;34. Calls on the Commission to submit a proposal to extend the scope of the INTERREG II initiative to regional planning activities as soon as possible; such an extension of the initiative should be accompanied by an appropriate increase in its budgetary funding;35. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission and to the Council of Europe.