Resolution on the communication from the Commission on Community structural assistance and employment (COM(96)0109 - C4-0230/96)
Date: 1996-11-28
Institutions: Committee on Regional Development, European Parliament
Subjects: EU activity, Structural Funds, economic and social cohesion, economic growth, employment policy, job creation, structural policy













EUR-Lex - 51996IP0358 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51996IP0358

Resolution on the communication from the Commission on Community structural assistance and employment (COM(96)0109 - C4-0230/96)  


Official Journal C 380 , 16/12/1996 P. 0090 





A4-0358/96Resolution on the communication from the Commission on Community structural assistance and employment (COM(96)0109 - C4-0230/96)The European Parliament,- having regard to the communication from the Commission on Community structural assistance and employment (COM(96)0109 - C4-0230/96),- having regard to the Commission document 'Action for employment in Europe: a Confidence Pact' (CSE(96)1),- having regard to its resolution of 29 June 1995 on the Fifth Periodic Report on the Social and Economic Situation and Development of the Regions of the Community ((OJ C 183, 17.7.1995. p. 33.)),- having regard to its resolution of 19 January 1996 on the Commission's Fifth Annual Report on the Structural Funds in 1993 ((OJ C 32, 5.2.1996, p. 131.)),- having regard to its resolution of 18 April 1996 on Economic and Monetary Union and economic and social cohesion ((OJ C 141, 13.5.1996, p. 205.)),- having regard to its resolution of 19 April 1996 on the complement to the Commission's annual report on the Cohesion Fund 1994 (COM(95)0222 - C4- 0237/95) ((OJ C 141, 13.5.1996, p. 265.)),- having regard to its resolution of 5 September 1996 on the Sixth Annual Report of the Commission on the Structural Funds in 1994 ((OJ C 277, 23.9.1996, p. 29.)),- having regard to its resolution of 5 September 1996 on development issues and Objective 1 structural measures in Portugal ((OJ C 277, 23.9.1996, p. 37.)),- having regard to its resolution of 5 September 1996 on development problems and structural measures under Objectives 1, 2 and 5b in Spain (1994-1999) ((OJ C 277, 23.9.1996, p. 40.)),- having regard to its resolution of 5 September 1996 on the Commission Decision on the establishment of a Community support framework for Community structural assistance for the Greek regions concerned by Objective 1, which is the whole country ((OJ C 277, 23.9.1996, p. 34.)),- 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 Social Affairs and Employment and the Committee on Womens' Rights (A4-0358/96),A. whereas the mass unemployment affecting the population of the European Union, particularly in peripheral regions and regions whose development is lagging behind, is reaching rates which threaten economic and social cohesion in the Member States and the Union as a whole,B. whereas the principal objective of structural measures is the development of less-developed regions, the ultimate purpose being economic and social cohesion,C. whereas one of the main objectives of regional development is to contribute to the creation and preservation of long-term jobs,D. whereas the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund together, allocated a budget of ECU 170 billion at 1995 prices for the period 1994-1999, will be able to play an important role in promoting employment,E. whereas better coordination of Community policies would contribute to the creation of additional jobs,F. whereas Structural Fund initiatives should take greater account of the demographic factor; whereas due consideration should also be given to the inevitable population migration from rural to urban areas with all the consequences thereof,1. Notes that, since 1989, the implementation of programmes supported under the Structural Funds has generally contributed to a significant increase in economic growth in a number of Member States, particularly in cohesion countries;2. Strongly supports all measures of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the European Social Fund (ESF) to increase or maintain employment and welcomes the Commission document, which has been drawn up in close cooperation between DG V and DG XVI;3. Notes that, despite this increase in economic growth and despite the ESF programmes (from which several million people have benefited since 1989 and will continue to benefit until 1999), the impact of Community structural policies on employment is insufficient, not lasting and difficult to quantify;4. Recalls that the Union's structural policy is a long-term policy and that it must ensure conditions for selective and sustainable growth over time; points out that this policy must not clash with the need to create and preserve lasting jobs;5. Observes that, while it is true that the success or failure of structural programmes cannot be assessed solely in terms of employment rate trends, it is genuinely worrying that it was in Objective 1 regions that average unemployment rose most sharply in the period 1987 to 1994, when the rate rose from 10% to 18%;6. Points to the importance of the priorities established by the Essen European Council and the need to relate those priorities to efforts to improve the employment impact of structural assistance;7. Believes, particularly as regards the ESF, that policy should not consist exclusively in training or in retraining workers or in improving their qualifications, but must aim to guarantee that these qualifications correspond to an actual need on the labour market;8. Calls, when the new projects for 1997-99 are defined, for particular attention to be given to investments which create permanent and socially sustainable jobs; stresses in this connection the significance of current regional distribution of appropriations, linked to per capita GDP (Objective 1) or to unemployment (Objective 2);9. Notes that the ESF contributes mainly indirectly to the creation of jobs, since it acts on the supply side of the labour market by making it easier for job-seekers to start work; in this context, reaffirms the vital importance of education and vocational training, and measures for disadvantaged groups (young people, women, the long-term unemployed);10. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to tackle the low take-up rate for the Structural Funds and points to the good results in countries where the governments make use of intermediate organizations such as employment services and educational establishments, in combination with the desired joint funding;11. Regrets the lack of methodology in assessing the impact of the Structural Funds on employment and the overestimation of the jobs created; calls on the Commission to remedy this situation despite the problems encountered and asks to be informed of the action taken and results achieved by the Commission;12. Notes that the bulk of Structural Fund appropriations earmarked for the least-developed regions contributed to projects to improve infrastructure and that their impact on job creation will therefore be felt in the medium and long term insofar as they are designed to create lasting jobs;13. Considers it absolutely decisive that a socially and ecologically sustainable type of economy is capable of mobilizing an entirely new potential in the regions supported through structural measures and might therefore overcome the hitherto inadequate efficiency of European regional policy, by reducing the excessive consumption of natural resources and investing more in human resources;14. Considers that, even without any increase, the volume of appropriations allocated to the Structural Funds is sufficient for them to make a significant contribution to employment if they were to be targeted at this objective and therefore calls on the Commission to urge that the Member States should make effective use of their room for manoeuvre in the current support frameworks to ensure the effective utilization of appropriations to support lasting measures to promote employment;15. Approves, therefore, the Commission's initiative to target the existing financial margins for the period 1994 to 1999 as a matter of priority towards the creation of jobs as part of the Confidence Pact for Employment which it is proposing;16. Supports the proposal to allocate the ECU 8.5 bn (from applying compensation for inflation to the structural assistance envelope) and the ECU 5.5 bn (amount granted for the second period of Objective 2) to employment;17. Points out that there is room for adjustment in programmes under the regional objectives, particularly Objectives 1 and 2, but for adjustments to take place, Monitoring Committees have to be familiarised with the new criteria and be involved in effective exchanges of information, experience and practice on increasing the employment impact of structural assistance;18. Considers that the impact of the Structural Funds on employment could be increased if the Commission were to:- develop specific measures aimed at ameliorating the situation in large towns;- support the increased flexibility of working hours to increase or maintain employment;- improve working conditions and the recognition of certain occupations to make them more attractive to workers;- take steps to fund European networks which are recognised as suitable for improving the circulation of information on job vacancies and job seekers to help employers find workers with suitable skills and to help workers find out about jobs which match their profile;19. Recommends that fuller use be made of opportunities for creating jobs, whether traditional (such as local products and cultural activities) or new (personal, social and environmental services);20. Considers it necessary, given the importance of small and medium-sized undertakings as job-creating elements in the private sector, to improve Community policies to support SMEs;21. Considers it necessary to improve the balance between support for fixed- capital and investment in human resources, both of which are vital in promoting development, structural adjustment and employment;22. Considers, in particular, that it is indispensable to strengthen all those initiatives which may improve access to education and vocational training both for young people and adults;23. Considers it appropriate, also, to implement special measures to support women, train unemployed women, reorganize working time for women working part-time and provide backing for women managers of SMEs who are creating jobs;24. Considers it necessary to aid the development of services targeted at business and local knowledge, which are preconditions for the development and dissemination of new technologies and the long-term improvement of competitiveness and growth;25. Supports the European strategy of encouraging local development and employment initiatives launched by the Commission and the project submitted to the Florence European Council, which involves the selection of pilot regions and towns prepared to commit themselves to a territorial pact aimed at reviving employment; calls on the Commission to add to the Communication on Community structural assistance and employment by incorporating a chapter designed to encourage the Member States to make better use, in the context of the current programming period, of the job creation potential provided by local initiatives in the sphere of development and employment;26. Considers that investment intended for research, technological development and innovation in the context of small and medium-sized undertakings under structural policies acts as a catalyst for employment and should be strengthened; urges, therefore, that positive consideration be given to productive investment in the area of R& D and innovation when deciding the eligibility of projects;27. Considers it vital to increase the participation of regional authorities in those regions holding powers in the field of infrastructure and communications, vocational training and the promotion of job creation;28. Considers it vital better to anticipate technological progress, particularly as regards information and communication technologies, so as to maximize their potential in terms of innovation and employment;29. Considers that a revived management of the Structural Funds might also make it possible to improve the job-intensity of growth (the 'scoring system', i.e. the selection of projects having the best cost-job creation ratio); asks the Commission to look into the possibility of extending this method;30. Asks the Commission to give priority to those pilot projects whose foreseeable result might be the creation of a viable and lasting business or cooperative;31. Underlines the key role which an active policy in favour of quality tourism may play in economic development and job creation in peripheral regions and regions lagging behind, a policy which should take account of respect for the environment and the cultural identity of the regions affected; supports the first Philoxenia programme submitted by the Commission in this connection;32. Stresses the growing role played by culture in regional development and the job-creation prospects which might be offered by Community support for culture;33. Considers that activities of an ecological nature and those linked to the environment have a great future and a tremendous job-creating potential and that they should therefore be strongly supported either under the various structural policies or, in particular, under the Cohesion Fund;34. Urges the Commission and the Member States to endeavour to intensify the local impact of infrastructure projects on employment in Objective 1 regions;35. Considers it vital to help to improve cooperation with the economic and social partners within the monitoring committees and asks the Commission and the Member States to undertake to introduce the necessary measures with a view to favouring a spirit of general mobilization among all those involved in reviving employment;36. Supports the Commission proposal to create territorial partnerships for employment between public and private bodies in the context of the Structural Funds, which should not replicate the role played by the programme-monitoring committees but which should act on the basis of employment surveys and specialized strategies following the example of experiments which have already proved successful in some regions;37. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to grant a qualification to those involved in monitoring committees enabling them to assess projects according to their contribution to sustainable development in the regions and modify indicators in this direction;38. Calls on the Commission to elicit greater sympathy for labour-intensive programmes from Monitoring Committee representatives and Structural Fund territorial pacts;39. Asks the Commission to initiate, as a matter of urgency, the necessary studies with the aim of making a more precise assessment of the impact of structural policies on employment, both ex ante and ex post, and to take account of regional diversity;40. Urges the Commission to finance, under Article 6 of the ESF Regulation, a programme of seminars and exchanges of information, experience and practice to raise awareness and stimulate discussion inside Monitoring Committees on how to improve the employment content of structural assistance;41. Urges the Commission to fund the exchange of know-how and experience, for example by means of seminar programmes, using written and electronic material, so that local and regional authorities can exploit existing experience in planning regional and local programmes under the auspices of the Structural Funds;42. Takes the view that the problem of reform of the Structural Funds is a separate debate which should take place at a later stage;43. Calls for the wider application of techniques for evaluating the quality (in terms of employment creation) of the programmes under consideration;44. Stresses that local and regional authorities have an important and irreplaceable role to play in combating unemployment, and that they should play an active part at all levels in decision-making and the formulation of policies and solutions;45. Reminds the Member States of their obligation to respect the additionality principle and stresses that respect for the nominal convergence criteria for EMU must not contradict the demands of economic and social cohesion;46. Suggests that further concentration and targeting should take place; recalls that the objectives of combating unemployment and creating jobs must incorporate the objective of equal opportunities, and specifically improvement of women's participation, with account taken of the various directives, resolutions and recommendations concerning equal treatment and equal opportunities for women and men;47. Recalls that female employment is concentrated in low-skill, low-pay, non- managerial and service sectors and is dominant in part-time employment, which is not satisfactory, given that many women in these sectors obtain high educational achievement, and in effect results in the waste of resources;48. Stresses that particular attention should be paid to vocational and life- long training for women, to facilitate both access to employment after career breaks and access to higher job levels; proposes broader action than that undertaken in Community Initiatives for human resources;49. Underlines the importance of a considerable strengthening of the involvement of local and regional authorities and the Social Partners as a criterion for structural funding and as a means to further equal opportunities, which can only foster economic and social cohesion which will remain the prime objective of the funds;50. Urges the Commission to draw up, in implementation of its communication on mainstreaming, practicable and concrete proposals as soon as possible with a view to having Structural Fund spending contribute to equality of opportunities; refers in this context to the conclusions of the European Conference on equality of opportunities in the Structural Funds held in Brussels on 7 and 8 March 1995 on the initiative of the Belgian Government;51. Believes that the achievement of equal opportunities in both the planning and the assessment phases much be a decisive criterion; calls on the Commission to adapt the evaluation systems and methodologies quickly to this objective;52. Calls, therefore, for greater emphasis to be placed on the use of the Structural Funds for the development of infrastructure and services to assist dependent people, for investment by enterprises which, by organizing work differently, facilitate the creation of jobs and the combination of work and family life and for measures to restore the social fabric in urban and rural areas, thus enabling women to be extricated from their social isolation;53. Expects the monitoring committees to evaluate Structural Fund spending at regular intervals with respect to equal opportunities and to support initiatives aimed at achieving this objective;54. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission and the Council.