Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the 'Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) establishing an Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-Accession (ISPA)'
Date: 1998-11-18
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: Central and Eastern Europe, European Union, accession to the European Union, aid system, cross-border cooperation, economic and social cohesion

22.2.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 51/7

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC)
establishing an Instrument for Structural Policies for Pre-Accession (ISPA)’

(1999/C 51/02)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) establishing an Instrument for
Structural Policies for Pre-Accession [COM(98) 138 final — 98/0091 (CNS)] (1);

having regard to the decision taken by the Council on 4 June 1998, under the first paragraph
of Article 198c of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to consult the Committee
of the Regions on the matter;

having regard to the decision taken by the Bureau of the Committee of the Regions on
12 March 1998 to instruct Commission 1 — Regional Policy, Structural Funds, Economic and
Social Cohesion, Cross-border and Inter-regional Cooperation — to draw up the relevant
opinion;

having regard to the draft opinion adopted by Commission 1 on 30 September 1988 (CdR
241/98 rev.) (rapporteurs: Mr Bracalente and Mr Meyer);

having regard to its opinion on the Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) laying down
general provisions on the Structural Funds (CdR 167/98 fin)(2),

adopted the following opinion at its 26th plenary session on 18 and 19 November 1998
(meeting of 18 November).

1.

Introduction and presentation of the Commission’s
position

As part of Agenda 2000 (3), the Commission
1.1.
submitted a series of proposals intended to reinforce
pre-accession for the ten applicant countries of Central
and Eastern Europe (CEEC) and Cyprus. The accession
process was officially initiated on 30 March 1998 with
the ten candidates from central and eastern Europe
(Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia,
Lithuania, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia)
and Cyprus. The bilateral intergovernmental confer-
ences held on 31 March 1998 marked the opening of
accession negotiations with Poland, the Czech Republic,
Estonia, Slovenia, Hungary and Cyprus (5+1).

All the candidate countries have entered into individual
accession partnerships decided upon on the basis of the
Regulation on assistance to the applicant States in
the framework of the pre-accession strategy(4). These
accession partnerships are agreements between the
Community and the countries seeking accession setting
out clear targets for the candidate countries and promis-
ing financial and technical support from the Community.

1.2.
In December 1997 the Luxembourg European
Council agreed on a substantial increase in assistance

(1) OJ C 164, 29.5.1998, p. 4.
(2) OJ C 373, 2.12.1998, p. 1.
(3) Agenda 2000 ‘For a stronger and wider Union’ COM(97)

2000 final.

(4) Council Regulation (EC) 622/98 — OJ L 85, 20.3.1998,

p. 1.

to prepare for accession and expanded the Phare
programme to include pre-accession programmes. The
Commission submitted the necessary draft regulations
in early March 1998.

1.3.
In addition to Phare programme support (pro-
visional 1999 budget ECU 1,3 billion, from 2000 onwards
ECU 1,5 billion, even if the number of beneficiary
countries is smaller once certain accessions have taken
place), the candidate countries are also to receive
assistance to restructure agriculture and to prepare for
Community structural policy (procedures, technical
operations etc.).

Over the period 2000-2006, an annual sum of ECU
500 million (at 1997 prices) is to be made available from
the EAGGF Guarantee Section for the reform of the
agriculture sector (including the development of an
efficient agricultural administration and reliable animal
and plant health monitoring systems) in the ten Central
and Eastern European countries. Resources are to be
distributed according to the land area used for agriculture
and the number of people employed in agriculture,
among other factors.

1.4.
The new Instrument for Structural Policies for
Pre-Accession (ISPA) is to be endowed with ECU 1,04
billion annually, which is to be distributed among the
ten CEEC. The Commission proposal provides for:

— the allocation of each year’s available resources to
the ten CEEC based on the criteria of population, area
and GDP measured in purchasing power parities;

C 51/8

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22.2.1999

— the drawing-up of a financing memorandum laying
down the arrangements for evaluation, management
and control;

1.11.
The draft regulation is to be adopted in conjunc-
tion with the coordinating regulation and the pre-
accession regulation on agriculture.

— decisions on budgetary commitments on the basis of

multiannual projects;

— the option to decommit funding if no work has been
started within the periods scheduled in the financial
protocol.

1.5.
The intention is to support measures classified
as priorities within the National Programmes for the
Adoption of the Acquis (NPAA). It is not a matter of
cofinancing ad-hoc investments, but rather of supporting
projects which can have a lasting and strategic catalytic
impact.

To ensure close coordination between the various
1.6.
forms of additional pre-accession assistance (Phare,
ISPA and pre-accession assistance for agriculture), the
Commission provides for a horizontal coordinating
regulation, as well as the establishment of a committee
charged with preventing duplications in support and
ensuring the compatibility of the projects receiving
funding.

1.7.
According to the draft regulation, the ISPA —
like the Cohesion Fund — is to be applied in two areas:

— the environment, where it will support implemen-
tation of the Community acquis (especially with
regard to improving water and air quality and waste
management), and

— transport, where it will facilitate links with trans-
European networks and the extension of these to the
East.

In principle, funding is to be made available for
1.8.
measures with a minimum total cost of ECU 5 million.
The proportion of ISPA funding may be up to 85 % of
public expenditure. Except in cases where there is a
substantial Community interest, this rate is reduced
according to the availability of cofinancing and the
measures’ capacity to generate revenues, and appropriate
application of the polluter-pays principle. Cofinancing
should come chiefly from the private sector.

1.9.
As an exception, the draft regulation provides
for up to 100 % financing of the total cost in the case of
preliminary studies and technical support measures. No
more than 2 % of the total ISPA allocation is available
for preliminary and feasibility studies.

1.10.
mission is to be assisted by an advisory committee.

In implementing the ISPA Regulation, the Com-

2. Assessment of the Commission proposals

2.1.
The COR welcomes the start of accession nego-
tiations with Hungary, Poland, the Czech Republic,
Slovenia, Estonia and Cyprus, seeing the joint opening of
the accession process as confirmation that enlargement
remains a process which extends to all candidate
countries. The COR regards enlargement as a process
of historical importance to the whole of Europe and
emphasizes the need to continue intensive dialogue with
the countries of the Mediterranean area and to press
ahead with the deepening of European integration as a
whole.

2.2.
The candidates for accession in Central and
Eastern Europe are engaged in an ongoing process of
sweeping economic and political change and, with the
support of the EU and its Member States including local
and regional authorities, are preparing to take on the
obligations of full membership. The COR would stress
that the Community and the candidate countries can
only overcome the tasks ahead by adopting a joint
approach.

2.3.
The COR welcomes the various structural assist-
ance instruments intended to help the applicant countries
in adopting the acquis.

2.4.
The COR also endorses the fact that the accession
candidates’ own efforts to adopt and implement the
Community acquis are being supported through the
Phare programme.

The COR is pleased to note that the Com-
2.5.
mission’s draft regulation has given priority to the
urgent need for development and improvement in the
areas of transport and the environment. However, it
does feel that other infrastructure networks (energy,
telecommunications) should also be taken into consider-
ation in this context, bringing the content of Article 2
of the regulation into line with that of Article 1(1).

The benefits of targeting Community structural
2.6.
resources experienced in the regions of the present
cohesion countries demonstrate that assistance of this
kind is a useful instrument for enhancing economic
potential. The COR therefore welcomes the establish-
ment of additional pre-accession instruments. This
extra assistance, particularly from the Instrument for
Structural Policies for Pre-Accession (ISPA), will make
it easier for the candidate countries to reduce structural
deficits, especially as regards the environment and
transport, and to prepare themselves for competitive

22.2.1999

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 51/9

pressure from the EU. It is particularly important to
ensure the requisite coordination between ISPA and
those Phare Institution Building measures which aim to
boost the applicant countries’ administrative capacity
for Structural Fund management, etc.

The Committee of the Regions believes that the
2.7.
local and regional levels should be involved as partners
in their own right in preliminary studies, programming
and implementing the structural policy measures (ISPA)

2.8.
The COR endorses the principle whereby the
Central and Eastern European countries take a share
in the financing of projects, emphasizing that the
involvement of private enterprise is a useful tool as it
also unleashes the dynamic forces of internal competition
which characterizes the internal market. The Committee
also points out that,
in publicizing and providing
information about the support instrument, substantial
efforts must be made to foster private participation so
that the available resources can be channelled into
projects which are expected to yield returns. In order
to achieve the objectives of reinforced cohesion, the
Committee feels it is essential to ensure close coordi-
nation between the various forms of Community pre-
accession assistance and the complete range of available
resources.

2.9.
The COR is assuming that the threshold value
of ECU 5 million per project mentioned in the draft
regulation will be applied with a certain degree of
flexibility, especially in the case of environmental pro-
jects. In this connection, the COR would point out that
raising the threshold value per project could make it
harder for decentralized authorities to participate in
starting up or implementing projects. This is particularly
true in the applicant countries, where the local and
regional authorities still have limited financial capacity
and scope for action.

2.10.
The COR feels that the following points should
be added to the content of applications listed in Annex I:

— observance of workplace health and safety regu-

lations;

— planned information and publicity actions (in pursu-

ance of Article 13 of the regulation).

2.11.
The COR feels that, among the criteria listed
in point 9.3 of the financial statement, greater emphasis
should be given to the intermodality of infrastructure
systems. The list in point 9.3 could also be extended to
include a criterion on improving safety standards.

it feels it is essential to give greater consideration to
aspects of environmentally sound cross-border transport
links and to include the creation of new border crossings
within the purview of support measures. These countries
should also be informed about environmental projects
being conducted in particularly important areas at local
and regional level so as to pass on to them experience
with waste disposal and water quality maintenance
which is both forward-looking and geared towards
adoption of the acquis.

3.2.
The Committee feels that the technical assistance
provided by the Commission should help to establish
specific projects tailored to national requirements. In
addition, national requirements should be the deciding
factor in the allocation of resources to different infra-
structure projects.

3.3.
The COR endorses the Commission’s proposal
to reserve 2 % of total resources for the financing of
preliminary studies and technical support costs provided
that such resources are used to build up institutional
and administrative capacity in the applicant countries,
and in particular to prepare local and regional authorities
for project management.

3.4.
The COR considers it particularly important
that, in cases where technical innovations are to be
introduced or high environmental protection standards
ensured,
is
accompanied by measures to train staff.

the project-related technical

support

Cross-border and interregional cooperation, as well as
experience gained at local level, makes a particularly
important contribution to European integration and
in the COR’s view. The COR would
cooperation,
emphasize the need to give all interested undertakings
the opportunity to take part in the evaluation procedures,
pointing out that regional and local authorities in both
the applicant countries and the Member States can make
a valuable contribution to the enlargement process.
They should therefore also be guaranteed a role in
implementing ISPA measures, especially in tandem with
reforms in administration and allocation of responsi-
bility which give them increased powers, e.g. in the
environment sphere.

3. Conclusions and recommendations

3.1.
The COR endorses the basic thrust of this
structural policy instrument. Nevertheless, based on the
experience of cross-border cooperation with the CEEC,

Here too the lessons to be learned from the current
structural policy should be put to good use. The
partnership principle, which is also enshrined in the
measures
in the applicant
countries, should also be a focus of ISPA intervention.
Local and regional authorities must ultimately exercise
joint influence at all stages (planning, project selection,

for rural development

C 51/10

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

22.2.1999

monitoring and evaluation) of such measures. The first
step should be representation on the committees which
are to monitor and assess ISPA measures, regardless of
whether they — as provided in the draft regulation —
are competent for the execution of a project or are
directly concerned by a project.

The projects to link applicant countries to the
3.5.
trans-European networks are intended to strengthen
economic and social cohesion between the future
accession areas and the EU as a whole. Planning measures
to link the accession candidates to the TENs should be
geared both to the needs of border regions in the present

Member States and to those of all the areas affected by
the development of these networks. In this context, the
COR once again emphasizes the need to continue to
give appropriate support to cross-border cooperation
under Interreg and Phare/CBC (1), ensuring full compati-
bility between projects funded under the two pro-
grammes. The Commission is asked in future to place
support for this kind of cooperation on a joint financial
and organizational footing so as to remove administrat-
ive obstacles to the implementation of cross-border
projects, making it the sole form of support for cross-
border cooperation.

(1) Cross-border cooperation.

Brussels, 18 November 1998.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Manfred DAMMEYER

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on:

— the ‘Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EC) No 1164/94

establishing a Cohesion Fund’, and

— the ‘Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) amending Annex II to Regulation (EC)

No 1164/94 establishing a Cohesion Fund’

(1999/C 51/03)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

having regard to the Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC) amending Regulation (EC)
No 1164/94 establishing a Cohesion Fund and the Proposal for a Council Regulation (EC)
amending Annex II to Regulation (EC) No 1164/94 establishing a Cohesion Fund (COM(98)
130 final) – 98/0104 (AVC) — 98/0118 (CNS) (1);

having regard to the Council Decision of 19 May 1998 to consult it on this subject, in
accordance with Article 130d and the first paragraph of Article 198c of the Treaty establishing
the European Community;

having regard to the Bureau decision of 13 May 1998 asking Commission 1 (Regional policy,
structural funds, economic and social cohesion, cross-border and inter-regional cooperation)
to prepare the opinion;

having regard to the draft opinion adopted by Commission 1 on 30 September 1998 (CdR 235/98
rev.) (rapporteurs: Mr Apostola´kos and Mr O’Neachtain);

(1) OJ C 159, 26.5.1998, p. 7.