Resolution on the complement to the Commission' s annual report on the Cohesion Fund (1994) (COM(95)0222 - C4-0237/ 95)
Date: 1996-04-19
Institutions: Committee on Regional Development, European Parliament
Subjects: Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain, environmental policy, report, transport policy













EUR-Lex - 51996IP0069 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51996IP0069

Resolution on the complement to the Commission' s annual report on the Cohesion Fund (1994) (COM(95)0222 - C4-0237/ 95)  


Official Journal C 141 , 13/05/1996 P. 0265 





A4-0069/96Resolution on the complement to the Commission's annual report on the Cohesion Fund (1994) (COM(95)0222 - C4-0237/95)The European Parliament,- having regard to the complement to the Commission's annual report on the Cohesion Fund (1994) (COM(95)0222 - C4-0237/95),- having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1164/94 of 16 May 1994 establishing a Cohesion Fund ((OJ L 130, 25.5.1994.)),- having regard to the Treaty on European Union, and, in particular, Article 130d of the EC Treaty,- having regard to its resolution of 29 June 1995 on the Annual Report of the Commission on the cohesion financial instrument (1993/94) ((OJ C 183, 17.7.1995, p. 36.)),- having regard to its resolution of 24 March 1994 embodying its recommendations on the proposal for a Council Regulation establishing a Cohesion Fund ((OJ C 114, 25.4.1994, p. 38.)),- having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Policy and the opinions of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and Industrial Policy, the Committee on Transport and Tourism and the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection (A4-0069/96),A. whereas the Regulation establishing the Cohesion Fund took effect on 26 May 1994; whereas Parliament's abovementioned resolution of 24 March 1994 contains Parliament's positions on the main aspects of that regulation prior to its assent,B. whereas the Commission decided not to submit a separate report on the part of 1994 covered by the regulation establishing the Cohesion Fund, but, instead, chose to submit a complementary document relating to various aspects of its report on the Cohesion Financial Instrument (1993-1994),C. whereas its abovementioned resolution of 29 June 1995 contains its positions on the Commission's report on the Cohesion Financial Instrument, and, accordingly, this resolution should concern only the Commission's complement containing information for the second part of 1994,D. whereas the complement is accompanied by an annex setting out the main data concerning the decisions on financial aid to the projects financed by the Cohesion Fund,E. whereas the Cohesion Fund was set up under Article 130d of the EC Treaty; whereas, however, the only reference establishing a conditional relationship to the economic and social convergence requirements is to be found in the Protocol on economic and social cohesion, that is to say, a text which does not have the same legal force as the Treaty,1. Considers the form employed by the Commission to provide information on the activities of the Cohesion Fund in 1994 to be inadequate, since it has merely supplied a complement to the report on the Cohesion Financial Instrument;2. Considers that, in view of the entry into force of a new Regulation, the period in question should have been examined separately, in a full report permitting a transparent evaluation of the impact of the new rules;3. Notes that the data supplied by the Court of Auditors show the budgetary execution for 1994 to be highly satisfactory for commitments but clearly insufficient for payments, which scarcely exceed 50%;4. Notes that, according to the Commission's complementary document, there has been no known case of fraud affecting projects adopted under the Cohesion Fund, and only one case of irregularity has been detected, in respect of which corrective action has already been taken;5. Welcomes the improvement in the overall balance as between funding of environmental and transport infrastructure projects, which represented, in 1994, 49.8% and 50.2% respectively;6. Notes, nonetheless, that the overall environment/transport infrastructure balance is the outcome of still-existing imbalances within each of the Member States concerned which cancel each other out; reminds the Commission that the 'reasonable balance' referred to in the Regulation should apply, allowing for the necessary flexibility, to each of the beneficiary Member States, and calls on it to ensure that this criterion is respected;7. Maintains that the acceptance of projects must be subject to the prior condition of proper environmental impact assessment and that the assessment reports must be completed before decisions are taken on such alternatives as might be available;8. Considers that the Commission has to monitor projects under the Cohesion Fund to see that the projects meet the principles of sustainable development and are in line with general Community policies in the area of nature conservancy, such as the Natura 2000 Network and the 'Habitats' Directive;9. Considers that the Commission has to monitor projects under the Cohesion Fund carefully to see that they are in line with the 'polluter pays' principle and the precautionary principle as laid down in Article 130r of the Treaty, with particular attention being paid to the long-term impact and networking of projects;10. Insists that the Commission must take the monitoring and supervision of the projects under the Cohesion Fund more seriously; calls on it to relaunch the monitoring committees and ensure that monitoring, evaluation and distribution of the results be done as carefully as prescribed in the LIFE financial instrument for the environment;11. Presses for an increase in the period of time granted to DG XI (Environment, Nuclear Safety and Civil Protection) during the consultation procedure for examining project documentation;12. Welcomes the increase in aid to the rail sector, which has risen from 15% to 26% since the Cohesion Fund came into force; reiterates, nonetheless, its concern at the disproportionate priority still being given to road infrastructures, and calls on the Commission to strengthen and improve the rail network so as to ensure intermodality; calls, further, on the Commission to pay greater attention to sea transport, which is less environmentally damaging and is essential for the island and peripheral regions which are a priority area for the trans-European networks policy under Article 129b of the EC Treaty;13. Notes that the Commission has still not submitted any data concerning Cohesion Fund support for projects in the Objective 1 regions of the one beneficiary Member State whose whole territory is not covered by that objective, and that this makes it difficult to assess the progress made towards the goal of doubling, in Objective 1 regions, the total financial contribution received by those regions from the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund;14. Recalls that the main objective of the Cohesion Fund is to strengthen economic and social cohesion, and that it should accordingly, despite the national context in which funding is allocated under it, contribute to action to combat inequalities between regions, both at Community level and within the beneficiary Member States;15. Reiterates its concern at the low number of funded projects in the most remote regions and calls, therefore, on the Commission substantially to increase the number of projects in those regions in order to meet the priorities laid down in Article 129b of the EC Treaty;16. Considers it insufficient that only one monitoring committee met over the period covered by the complementary document; believes that this demonstrates the lack of dynamism and efficiency afflicting this essential mechanism for monitoring the actions of the Fund, and calls on the Member States and the Commission to step up the activities of these committees;17. Insists once again on the need to open up the monitoring committees to the regional and local authorities, as is already the case in one of the beneficiary Member States, thereby complying with Article F(3) of the implementing provisions relating to the Cohesion Fund;18. Insists also that the monitoring committees, on which elected regional and local authorities should be represented, must be given greater powers as regards project selection, charting the priorities in each instance, and managing financial resources;19. Welcomes the continuation of on-the-spot inspection missions throughout 1994;20. Recognizes the Cohesion Fund as an important factor in the development of the less-developed Member States of the European Union and its contribution to their making up ground in terms of infrastructure projects in the field of the environment, transport and water supply;21. Notes that the widening disparities between the regions and Member States of the European Union are having an adverse effect on the pace of economic development and monetary stability;22. Considers that the Cohesion Fund could help to increase Member States' productivity by means of improving transport infrastructure, supporting trans-European networks and promoting environmental policy;23. Stresses that the Cohesion Fund as an instrument of Community action has not only benefited the countries eligible for its resources but has also, through increased demand and trade, boosted demand for goods and services throughout the European Union;24. Considers that the Cohesion Fund, which is directly linked with achieving the nominal convergence criteria set out in the Treaty on European Union, should help, through its operation and the proper funding of projects meeting the eligibility criteria, to alleviate the financial pressures on the Member States;25. Stresses that the Commission has still not replied to Parliament's request for information in paragraph 28 of its abovementioned resolution of 29 June 1995 concerning the possible application of the provisions of Article 6 of the Cohesion Fund Regulation regarding conditionality and, therefore, the suspension of aid on the grounds of non-fulfilment of the EMU convergence programmes;26. Considers that Article 6 of the Regulation should be interpreted in the light of the main objective of the Fund, namely to contribute to the economic and social cohesion of the Union, as laid down in Article 130d of the EC Treaty, and should consequently not be interpreted in simplistic and inflexible terms;27. Agrees that there must be strict compliance with the conditions under which the four beneficiary States receive finance from the Fund, but considers that rigorous adherence to the provisions of Article 6 of Regulation 1164/94, which links disbursements to the absence of excessive government deficits, would undermine the efforts of the Member States concerned to promote development and, therefore, the entire convergence programme;28. Calls on the Commission to communicate the provisions it has adopted on the procedure for giving effect to the principle of conditionality underlying the Cohesion Fund;29. Asks to be informed beforehand of any decision which the Commission may propose to adopt involving the suspension of Cohesion Fund aid, and of the budgetary consequences of any such decision;30. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and Commission.