Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Establishment of European territorial pacts: proposal for a revision of the tripartite contracts and agreements
Date: 2006-10-12
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: governance, interinstitutional relations, region-EU relationship, regional and local authorities, regional cooperation

6.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/31

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the Establishment of European territorial pacts:
proposal for a revision of the tripartite contracts and agreements

(2007/C 51/06)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

HAVING REGARD TO the UK presidency's decision of 21-22 November 2005, under the first paragraph
of Article 265 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, to consult it on the matter;

HAVING REGARD TO its Bureau's decision of 25 April 2006 to instruct the Commission for Constitu-
tional Affairs, European Governance and the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice to draw up an opinion
on the subject;

HAVING REGARD TO the conclusions of the meeting of the High Level Group on Governance and the EU,
which took place in London on 21 and 22 November 2005;

HAVING REGARD TO the conclusions of the meeting of the High Level Group on Governance and the
EU, which took place in Turku on 2 and 3 October 2006;

HAVING REGARD TO the contribution from the European Commission presented to the meeting of the
High Level Group on Governance and the EU held in Turku;

HAVING REGARD TO the European Commission's White Paper on European Governance of 25 July
2001, COM(2001) 428 final (1);

HAVING REGARD TO the Communication from the Commission A framework for target-based tripartite
contracts and agreements between the Community, the States and regional and local authorities of 11 December
2002, COM(2002) 709 final;

HAVING REGARD TO the Communication from the Commission to the European Council A citizens'
agenda — Delivering results for Europe of 10 May 2006, COM(2006) 211 final;

HAVING REGARD TO its opinion (CdR 121/2005) on Better lawmaking 2004 and Better Regulation for
Growth and Jobs in the European Union, adopted on 12 October 2005 (2);

HAVING REGARD TO its draft opinion (CdR 135/2006 rev. 1) adopted by the Commission for Constitu-
tional Affairs, European Governance and the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice on 30 June 2006
(rapporteur: Mr Raymond Forni, president of the Regional Council of Franche-Comté (FR/PES));

1)

2)

3)

4)

WHEREAS tripartite contracts and agreements are an appropriate tool to foster multi-level govern-
ance in Europe, not least by involving local and regional authorities in the implementation of Com-
munity policies, while at the same time taking account of the institutional set-up in each Member
State;

WHEREAS this new optional instrument of governance is calculated to secure greater flexibility, effi-
ciency and democracy within the European Union, and thus helps boost public support for the Euro-
pean venture;

WHEREAS it has set the re-launch of tripartite contracts and agreements as one of its political prio-
rities for 2006 and is seeking in particular to expand the role and build on the potential of this
instrument in the implementation of the Lisbon strategy;

WHEREAS the more widespread use of tripartite contracts and conventions, which are executive
planning instruments, serves to render planning policy more coherent and consistent, be it at Euro-
pean or local level, and to bring diversity to the instruments used in the context of consultation
between all the institutions concerned with economic and social cohesion policy in the regional
sphere;

(1) OJ C 287 of 12.10.2001, p. 1-29.
(2) OJ C 81 of 4.4.2006, p. 6-10.

C 51/32

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.3.2007

5)

6)

WHEREAS the results of the experimental phase of the tripartite contracts and agreements have
been mixed and the instrument itself — together with its operating arrangements, goals and scope —
needs to be redefined;

WHEREAS at the meeting of the High Level Group on Governance and the EU on 2 and 3 October
2006, it made, in the interests of local and regional authorities, a tangible contribution to the revision
of the instrument with a view to ensuring that it reaches its full potential at the meeting of the High
Level Group on Governance and the EU; in the conclusions to its meeting, the High Level Group
pointed out that there were no obstacles to the continued operation of the instrument; it also drew
attention to the interest expressed by a number of Member States in introducing a new experimental
phase, on a voluntary basis;

adopted the following opinion unanimously at its 66th plenary session, held on 11 and 12 October
2006 (meeting of 12 October):

VIEWS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMMITTEE OF
THE REGIONS

1. Promoting and enhancing the partnership principle in

the workings of the European Union

its expectations, yet feels that, without challenging the relevance
of this instrument per se, every possible effort must, on the
contrary, be made in order to make its use more common and
more widespread;

The Committee of the Regions

1.1
feels that, given the economic, social, environmental and
democratic challenges Europe faces, a genuine partnership is
vital to bolstering — and thereby boosting the efficiency of —
the activities of the European Union, the Member States and
local and regional authorities;

points out that consolidating the interinstitutional part-
1.2
nership principle,
in accordance with the principles of subsi-
diarity and proportionality, is fundamental to building the kind
of Europe that all European citizens can feel is their ‘common
home’;

1.3
believes that putting the partnership principle into prac-
tice on the ground would make it possible to overcome the
weaknesses of the current system and would provide real added
value in attaining the joint objectives that have been well
defined along the lines set out in the Citizens' agenda proposed
by the Commission in its communication of 10 May 2006,
without thereby affecting the institutional remits of the various
stakeholders concerned;

that

notes, moreover,

1.4
the debate with the public
currently under way in the Member States as part of the reflec-
tion period shows that it is possible to move closer to European
citizens through tangible, high-profile measures, and that the
direct involvement of local and regional authorities in the Euro-
pean venture is an essential element in this process.

2.3
notes that, so far, just one tripartite agreement has been
signed — with the Lombardy region — and laments the Euro-
pean Commission's lack of commitment towards signing the
three other projected pilot agreements (Birmingham, Lille and
Pescara), the innovative content of which could well have deliv-
ered real added value; notes in this context, new initiatives
emanating from local and regional authorities (such as the Prin-
cipality of Asturias and the autonomous Province of Trento) and
draws attention to the measures taken by certain European
and national associations with a view to bolstering and
promoting the instrument;

2.4
recalls how local and regional authorities, which are to a
large extent responsible for transposing and implementing EU
legislation and measures, showed a great deal of interest in the
idea of
tripartite contracts and agreements when it was
launched, as these would be a way of boosting their own effi-
ciency;
they are also a means of assisting EU institutions,
national governments, and regional and local authorities in the
identification and integrated implementation of
their actions
and activities, which would enhance the role of each institu-
tional player;

2.5
does not, therefore, endorse the appraisal made by the
European Commission to the effect that ‘no local, regional or
central authority has shown itself to be particularly interested in
the proposal’;

2. The experimental phase of

tripartite contracts and

agreements: the Committee of the Regions' assessment

The Committee of the Regions

has from the outset backed the idea of

2.1
tripartite
contracts and agreements as a partnership-based approach for
the more fluid and flexible implementation of legislation and
programmes with a strong territorial impact;

observes that the results of the experimental phase of
2.2
the tripartite contracts and agreements have failed to live up to

2.6
draws attention to the precarious nature of the experi-
mental phase, which has too limited a range; after having noted
the evaluation made by the European Commission feels that a
revision of this instrument is all the more necessary, taking
special account of the following points:

— greater transparency and communication about this new
instrument as part of Plan D and beyond, and, more specifi-
cally,
information campaigns for those who might poten-
tially benefit from it, i.e. local and regional authorities, and
also for the Member States;

6.3.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/33

— demonstrable and genuine leadership at all levels;

— sound coordination of sources of funding;

— coordinate and synchronise, at various institutional

levels,
the programming, planning, decision-making,
implementa-
tion and administrative processes of major EU policy objec-
tives and projects;

— renewed interest by the European Commission, which
instrument

in a flexible, practical

launched the initiative,
that is light on the public purse;

— appropriate coordination within the European Commission;

— sound ‘vertical’ cooperation between the various tiers of
government, not least between national and regional/local
level,
in line with the subsidiarity principle as a ‘regulating’
factor;

— organisation of the various partners involved, headed by a
clearly identified ‘leader’, while respecting the powers and
responsibilities of each one;

— explicit mention of the instrument's added value for the
European Commission, the Member States and the local and
regional authorities;

draws attention to the fact that,

2.7
in its resolution of
December 2003, the European Parliament welcomed the instru-
ment and expressly requested that the pilot scheme cover a
sufficiently large number and variety of cases and that funding
be made available to facilitate the requisite publicity;

2.8
draws attention to the replies to the questionnaire sent
to the Member States by the Finnish presidency; the replies indi-
cate that a majority of
the Member States is in favour of
entering into tripartite or multipartite agreements embracing
Member States, regional and local authorities and the European
Commission, with a view to promoting the partnership prin-
ciple in the implementation of European policies;

the instrument, by proposing several

2.9
envisages contributing to meeting the fundamental
conditions set out by the European Commission to ensure the
success of
lines of
approach;
is, moreover, ready to act as a driving force for
generating the political momentum needed to develop use of
this instrument; nevertheless, stresses that no initiative can
succeed without the support and commitment of the Member
States concerned as well as that of the European Commission.

3. The establishment of European territorial pacts: the

Committee of the Regions' recommendations

The Committee of the Regions

advocates a revision of

3.1
the tripartite contracts and
agreements and their redefinition as European territorial pacts
so as to adapt them to the needs and interests of the various
tiers of government likely to be party to them;

trusts that the European territorial pacts will make it

3.2
possible to:

— deliver the EU's key political goals and priorities flexibly,
effectively and on a voluntary basis through targeted part-
nerships that facilitate, among other things, the pursuit of
cohesion policy objectives; a local-level approach to the
Lisbon strategy; highly targeted communication initiatives;
and local-level coordination of key European policies in
areas such as transport and energy, as well as implementa-
tion of integrated policy strategies, as in the case of maritime
and coastal policy;

— secure the effective management of

tripartite contracts and
agreements as initially proposed by the European Commis-
sion so as to arrive at solutions that reflect grassroots concerns
and do not require recourse to heavy and expensive legisla-
tive and/or regulatory mechanisms, and to develop partner-
ship-based projects under the responsibility of the regions
and local authorities and enjoying technical and financial
support from the national and European levels. This could
prove particularly useful in regions with a serious natural
and/or economic and social handicap or by sparsely popu-
lated regions — such as those on the outermost fringes —
where European legislation and policies may sometimes be
difficult to transpose or apply;

stresses that these policy tools would,

3.3
in themselves,
deliver a great deal of added value both for regional and local
authorities and for the European Union as they would make it
possible to tailor EU activities more effectively to real local and
regional needs, and would thus more readily respond to specific
grassroots concerns;

3.4
affirms its willingness to work together with the Euro-
pean Commission, the EU presidency and the other institutions
concerned, in particular with the High Level Group on Govern-
ance, to identify and assess the specific added value of such
contracts and agreements by establishing appropriate yardsticks
and indicators;

3.5
feels that the freedom to draw on European territorial
pacts of this kind and the negotiation of such pacts on the basis
of a shared commitment on the part of the various stakeholders
concerned would be conducive to strengthening ongoing and
regular dialogue between the three tiers of government — from
drafting right up to implementation, including instances where
more than one Member State might be involved. This instru-
ment must, in any case, be designed to be fully in keeping with
existing legislation, whether
regional, national or European,
regarding both the division of powers in each Member States
and compliance with current sectoral rules or those governing
the management and control of financial resources;

C 51/34

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

6.3.2007

thinks that, in pursuit of the common objectives, there
3.6
can be no genuine partnership without financial
input from
each of the parties to the agreement; proposes that any consid-
eration of the funding of European territorial pacts should focus
on potential synergies between (i) at European level, existing
budget headings in the policy areas concerned and the Struc-
tural Funds, and (ii) budget resources available at local, regional
and national level, without creating an additional Community
regional policy instrument or applying for additional funding to
achieve the aim in question;

3.7
considers that the common aim should be to optimise
the impact of the initiative by making quite clear, at field level,
the added Community value it brings. This added value
becomes clear when powers to legislate for, develop or imple-
ment certain policies are spread between different public admin-
istrations (European, national, regional or local); calls on the
European Commission to determine precise indicators
for
defining this added value;

asks the European Commission to broaden the European
3.8
territorial pacts for use in other fields and other European
policy areas such as the environment, and to foster their use in
relation, among other things, to the Lisbon strategy, cohesion
policy, major European infrastructure and maritime policy;

3.9
considers it advisable to step up consultation between
the European Union, the EU Council, the European Parliament
and the Committee of the Regions to develop and implement
the European territorial pacts; feels, moreover, that this can
only be done with the support of the national governments
involved;

3.10
repeats its request to the European Commission to
reinforce horizontal coordination by its secretariat-general in the
management of this new tool;

3.11
proposes that regular consultation mechanisms be put
in place between the various government authorities involved in

Brussels, 12 October 2006

a territorial pact; these mechanisms must remain flexible and
involve only a limited number of staff; territorial pacts must be
designed in such a way that the Commission is able to conclude
them with all Member States and regional or local bodies which
fulfil the established criteria and conditions, meeting the require-
ments of objectivity, openness and transparency. The regions
undertake to cooperate with the Commission and the Member
States in establishing such criteria;

3.12
considers it vital to improve interplay and information
exchange between local and regional authorities who are party
to territorial pacts; and proposes that provision be made for
annual monitoring through yearly meetings between the
government authorities involved, or through public hearings;

calls, in conclusion, on the European Commission to
3.13
set in motion a genuine information campaign, coupled with
awareness-raising activities, for the launch of the European terri-
torial pacts, targeted at all potential stakeholders and clearly
highlighting the purpose and political importance of the instru-
ment;

3.14
believes it to be necessary that the definition of terri-
torial pacts make formal reference to the importance of local
social partners, who are players in local and regional develop-
ment;

3.15
considers it advisable, given the important role that
citizen participation should play in identifying the objectives of
the European territorial pacts, that actions are carried out by the
European institutions to encourage this participation as well as
the implementation of proposals for instruments facilitating
citizen participation;

instructs its president to forward this opinion to the
3.16
Council, the European Commission, the European Parliament,
Member State governments and the High Level Group on
Governance and the EU.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Michel DELEBARRE