Resolution on development problems and structural measures in Italy
Date: 1997-02-18
Institutions: Committee on Regional Development, European Parliament
Subjects: Community support framework, Friuli-Venezia Giulia, Italy, Latium, Lombardy, Structural Funds, Umbria, Valle d'Aosta, Veneto, market, regional aid, regional development













EUR-Lex - 51996IP0405 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51996IP0405

Resolution on development problems and structural measures in Italy  


Official Journal C 085 , 17/03/1997 P. 0034 





A4-0405/96Resolution on development problems and structural measures in ItalyThe European Parliament,- having regard to the Commission Decision of 29 July 1994 on the establishment of the Community support framework for Community structural measures in the Italian regions covered by Objective 1, which are Abruzzo, Basilicata, Calabria, Campania, Molise, Puglia, Sardinia and Sicily (C4- 0050/96) ((OJ L 250, 26.9.1994, p. 21.)),- having regard to the Commission Decisions of 14 and 16 December 1994 on the approval of single programming documents for Community structural measures in the regions covered by Objective 2 in Italy (C4-0051/96 and C4- 0052/96) ((OJ L 382, 31.12.1994.)),- having regard to the single programming documents (SPDs) for Community structural measures under Objective 5b,- having regard to the agreement of 26 July 1995 concluded between the Commission and the Italian Government granting, inter alia, an extension of the period for using the Structural Funds to meet precise commitments made by Italy to ensure the efficient management of the Funds,- having regard to the conclusions of the meeting of ministers responsible for regional policy and spatial planning held in Venice on 3 and 4 May 1996,- having regard to the motion for a resolution tabled by Mrs Muscardini on closure of the Falck plant in Sesto S. Giovanni (B4-0592/95),- having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Policy and the opinion of the Committee on Social Affairs and Employment (A4-0405/96),A. whereas the Structural Funds are an important means of reducing the most serious disparities between the various areas of the Union and within individual states,B. whereas the policy of economic and social cohesion and cooperation and solidarity between regions is one of the Union's prime objectives,C. whereas the pursuit of this policy also requires sufficient capacity for programming and coordinating the measures to be funded,D. having regard to the desirability of, and the notable results achieved in, using the funding provided for in Article 10 of the ERDF Regulation and whereas up to 1% of the financial resources for the period from 1994 to 1999 - amounting to ECU 141 bn (at 1992 prices) - may be earmarked for research into innovative measures and pilot projects,E. whereas action to achieve economic and social cohesion must take account of environmental protection, in keeping with the Union's goal of attaining sustainable development,F. whereas Italy is characterized by large and persisting regional disparities which are much greater than those in the other Member States, as shown by the fact that per capita GDP in the Objective 1 areas is only 60% of that in the central and northern regions; whereas these disparities have an alarming impact on the rate of unemployment, which is 21.3% in the south, compared with 7.1% in the north and 10.2% in Central Italy, the national average being 12.2% (ISTAT figures - December 1996) and the Community average 10.8% (EUROSTAT figures - September 1996);G. whereas the Structural Fund resources allocated to Italy total ECU 21 680.2 million for the period 1994-1999, 14 860 million of which are allocated to Objective 1,H. whereas, despite the problems regarding its use, the Objective 1 Community support framework (CSF) for 1989-1993 showed positive results, such as an increase in value added of Lit. 1670 bn per year, accounting for 0.5% of the total value added produced annually in southern Italy and an additional 40 000 full-time jobs over the whole 5-year period, equivalent to 0.6% of total jobs in southern Italy,I. whereas over the period 1989-1993 the use of the Structural Funds came up against significant obstacles which caused delays in their use and the loss of some Community resources allocated for Italy; whereas for the period 1994-1999 only 21.9% of the appropriations assigned to Objective 1 were committed and only 10.5% of payments were made, with an equally worrying situation prevailing for Objectives 2 and 5b (the figures for Objective 2 being 26.2% and 7.6% respectively and for Objective 5b 8.6% and 2.1% respectively (figures on 30 September 1996),J. whereas during the period 1994-1999 the Structural Funds in the Italian regions will be utilized in a context of budget reductions because of the convergence efforts being made in order to meet the criteria for the single currency; whereas, therefore, in many cases and notwithstanding the national commitment to co-financing, the Funds may turn out to be the main resources available for reducing disparities between regions, so that it is more essential than ever to use them in their entirety in those regions,K. having particular regard to the ESF and the fact that it is greatly under-used in most Member States (24% of appropriations and 19% of commitments were left unused in the Union in 1995),L. whereas unemployment and, especially, youth unemployment, is, and is likely to remain, the most serious problem affecting the economy of Italian Objective 1 regions,M. whereas vast areas of Italy are in a serious state of industrial decline, even in the most advanced northern regions; whereas such situations are likely to compromise the economic activities of small and medium-sized undertakings, especially those which supply other industries; whereas those undertakings should be encouraged to operate along sustainable lines,N. having regard to the particular geographical configuration of the regions covered by Objective 1, in that they are in a peripheral position in relation to the economically most advanced European regions but in a central position in relation to the regions bordering the Mediterranean, the development cooperation potential of which - sadly - has scarcely been turned to account to date,O. having regard to the shortage of infrastructure throughout Italy, due in part to its geographical situation and mountainous terrain, with the problem being most serious in the Objective 1 regions,P. having regard to the shortcomings of Italian national and regional administrative structures, the large number of decision-making bodies and the complexity of national procedures, in addition to Community procedures, and the existence of a plethora of laws which are sometimes contradictory,Q. whereas 31 December 1997 was set as the deadline for payments relating to the period 1989-1993, except for some forms of intervention, the deadline for which was 31 December 1996,R. whereas the discontinuation of the special measures for the South and the abolition of the Agency for the South has put an end to a system which had become inefficient, but without there being any improvement in the social and economic conditions which made the agency necessary,S. whereas cultural and environmental measures and the judicious exploitation of the cultural heritage, environmental resources, and the countryside must be incorporated in the development programme strategy, not only as a driving force for growth in these regions, but also in order to achieve a better quality of life,T. having regard to the importance of improving the level of decentralization, in line with the principle of subsidiarity, not least in order to ensure greater transparency in the spending of Community resources,U. whereas it is important to involve constantly, as a matter of priority, the economic and social partners in the planning, assessment and monitoring of the use of the Structural Funds,V. having regard to the discussion which took place at the public hearing on the use of the Structural Funds in Italy held by its Committee on Regional Policy, with the participation of representatives of national, regional and local administrations and of the economic and social partners,W. whereas forestry performs an important environmental, economic, and social role in the Union's rural areas, especially in outlying regions,1. Points out that the social and economic situation in the Italian regions, especially the Objective 1 regions, continues to make Community Structural Fund assistance essential, and, indeed, that the problems relating to the use of these instruments constitute further evidence of the structural and infrastructural weaknesses of those regions;2. Expresses concern at and deplores the fact that some countries, especially Italy, are unduly slow to make use of the structural resources at their disposal, and considers it essential to take into account the particularly complex social and economic situation in the Objective 1 regions, requiring more resolute but none the less flexible action;3. Calls on the authorities responsible actively to promote the implementation of regional employment pacts, launching innovative policies along the lines proposed in the Commission's European strategy for local development and employment initiatives;4. Expresses its support for the resolution of 19 July 1996 of the Monitoring Committee for the Objective 1 CSF which outlines a rescheduling mechanism designed to facilitate the transfer of resources assigned to programmes whose implementation is delayed to measures already under way or about to be started, and which can in fact be completed within the time-limits laid down, in order to obviate the risk that, when the implementation of programmes is seriously delayed, resources assigned to the weak regions of Italy might be lost;5. Notes that the degree of efficiency attained in implementing structural policies varies, at times considerably, from one region to another and that improvements therefore can and must be made, not least where the less enterprising regions are concerned;6. Considers it intolerable, in the present socio-economic situation, that further Community funds might be lost because they are not used and therefore calls on the Community, national, regional and local authorities to take prompt action with regard to multi-regional and regional operational programmes to ensure that they are amended, if necessary, in favour of a larger allocation for more successful programmes; believes, further, that in serious cases where resources are persistently underused, the Italian Government should select alternative public agencies which could be called upon to implement the programmes; considers that the role which the Budget Ministry currently plays in respect of the Structural Funds is of great importance, and hopes that the National Control Centre's powers will be extended;7. Considers that in the 1998 financial year the Commission should carry out a proper assessment of the extent to which funds entered in the budget actually be used and examine possible alternative measures to be financed by funds which would otherwise remain unused;8. Considers that priority should be given to speeding up and simplifying procedures, and requests that steps be taken to speed up decision-making and the execution of programmes without neglecting their social and environmental impact, and hopes that the Italian Government will undertake to guarantee fast-track treatment for administrative procedures concerning the use of Community funds, bearing in mind that more efficient use of the Structural Funds strengthens the principle of economic and social cohesion;9. Considers it essential to improve horizontal coordination between the various sectors of national and regional administrations as well as vertical coordination between governments, regions, local authorities and the social partners; in this context hopes that the creation of the National Control Centre and the regional control centres will make it possible to step up coordination and improve the execution of the forms of intervention co-financed by the European Union;10. Stresses the shortcomings of national and regional administrative structures, which often result in incomplete programming and hence the inefficient use of the Funds and requests that a more important role be given to programmes and projects specifically aimed at training senior civil servants - including those in local bodies and local authorities - and that the full potential of the technical assistance instrument should be used in order to help public administrations;11. Hopes that the end of the special measures for the South and the abolition of the Agency for the South will be accompanied as soon as possible by the introduction of a new regional development policy, respecting the principle of additionality, and in this context emphasizes that the Structural Funds represent, not least from the methodological point of view, one of the few existing instruments for carrying out a coherent development policy of this kind capable of tackling the problems of the disadvantaged regions of the south as a whole;12. Urges the Commission, in the light of the precedent constituted by the Abruzzo region, to consider temporary compensation measures designed to cushion the impact of the termination of funding for those regions, zones or areas whose recent socio-economic development will serve to render them ineligible for structural assistance at the end of the programming period;13. Considers that the underdevelopment of the EU's Mediterranean policy is having adverse effects on the development of the south and therefore urges that the introduction of MEDA should take due account of this area, as well as the other regions in the south of the Union, in particular by means of inter-regional cooperation between the two shores of the Mediterranean;14. Considers that support for and promotion of cultural activities and infrastructure, in particular the commitment of resources for vocational training linked, on the one hand, to cultural matters, and, on the other, to tourism and the small and medium-sized businesses operating in tourism- related fields, constitute an important instrument for socio-economic development and the creation of new jobs; therefore considers it appropriate to increase the possibilities for Structural Fund intervention;15. Considers it important to improve the quality of planning and hence to involve, beforehand, the private and public operators concerned; therefore considers it essential to reinforce the principle of partnership with the social partners so as to integrate economic and social operators in the process of implementing Community measures from the planning stage onwards; also considers it important to improve the programming of projects to be co-financed by the Structural Funds;16. Deplores the problems reported by economic and social operators and by local authorities participating in Community planning, as regards both information and the carrying out of work;17. Suggests that the regions consider the possibility of opening offices to represent them in the European Union which could act as the conduit for the information required to enable public and private entities in the individual regions concerned to make better use of the structural programmes;18. Suggests that better and more profitable use be made of the resources available, as regards both informing the potential users of Community resources and educating public and private entities, whether or not professional bodies, about Community, national and local legislation and procedures so as to offset obvious shortcomings in an area of such vital importance;19. Stresses the need to step up solidarity, that is to say, the principle which informs economic and social cohesion, by ensuring better coordination in the use of the Structural Funds, whilst pointing out that this must be the guiding principle in the devising, planning and implementation of all Community policies;20. Believes, above all where Objective 2 is concerned, that a special effort must be made to boost local development, in particular through operations designed to support small and medium-sized undertakings, and emphasizes the importance of job creation, of research and development geared towards innovation and a skilled workforce, of the environment and sustainable development, and of equal opportunities;21. Hopes, to ensure that the ESF is put to better use, that planning will be made more flexible, ESF and ERDF operations will be dovetailed to more profitable effect, and hence that the Commission's DGs V and XVI will work in closer cooperation to enable documents to be approved more easily;22. Maintains that higher priority should be given to the development of human resources, since greater technical and vocational skills, especially in innovative high-technology sectors, are essential in order to bring down the inordinately high unemployment rate in many Italian regions;23. Draws attention to the specific problems of the areas covered by Objective 5b, especially as regards the abandonment of mountain country, leading to damage to the hydrogeological system and the environment in general and the risk that the distinctive cultural values embodied in those areas will die out;24. Considers that the development of sustainable forestry should be promoted, not least where individual agricultural holdings are concerned, since this would improve farm incomes, maintain population levels in rural and/or remote areas, and pave the way for an environment-friendly policy to be put into effect;25. Supports the continuation of and an increase in financial operations under Article 10 of the ERDF Regulation, a greater role for local and regional bodies, and the promotion of exchanges of experiences at regional level so as to enable work, experience, skills and information to be disseminated, thus making it possible - through partnership - to remedy some of the principal imperfections encountered in certain regions that have already been successfully overcome in other regions;26. Believes that the present situations such as that obtaining in Italy show that the procedures set out in Community Structural Fund Regulations are in urgent need of comprehensive simplification;27. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Commission, the Council, the Italian Government, the two Houses of the Italian Parliament and the executives of the Italian autonomous regions and provinces.