Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the leverage effect of the Structural Funds
Date: 2007-03-23
Institutions: European Committee of the Regions
Subjects: EU regional policy, Structural Funds, economic and social cohesion, eligible region, project management, regional cooperation

7.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 156/1

III

(Preparatory Acts)

COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

69th PLENARY SESSION 23 MARCH 2007

Opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the leverage effect of the Structural Funds

(2007/C 156/01)

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS

— Europe is currently experiencing huge socio-economic changes and technological challenges that are
central to the main objective of the 2000 Lisbon Agenda, maintaining and developing a European
model able to combine prosperity and solidarity. Europe can do this only by keeping a robust policy
framework which provides actors with instruments not only to seize new opportunities but also to
deal with the repercussions. The regions and local communities are among the most exposed to these
challenges but are also the best-positioned to translate strategic policy orientations into concrete
actions, capable of mobilising social and economic actors across Europe.

— The renewed EU strategy for growth and jobs can, therefore, succeed only if it is able to mobilise its
resources in all of the Union's territories. Both EU and national budgets are under pressure, however,
and Europe must, therefore, attempt to find the best way of increasing the financial resources avail-
able. The CoR considers that, because of its strategic orientation and delivery mechanisms, cohesion
policy is an effective lever at the Union's disposal.

— The CoR considers that the leverage effect of EU cohesion policy can be significantly reinforced in the
2007-2013 programming period. The tried and tested principles underpinning cohesion policy have
been complemented by a number of measures: the adoption of a more strategic approach for cohesion
policy, earmarking and a greater concentration of funds in priority sectors, an improved legal frame-
work for adopting innovative financing schemes, the attachment of due importance to urban develop-
ment programmes and upgrading territorial cooperation.

C 156/2

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.7.2007

THE COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS,

HAVING REGARD TO the European Commission's decision of 24 March 2006, to consult it on this
subject, under Article 265(1) of the Treaty establishing the European Community;

HAVING REGARD TO the letter from the European Parliament of 20 July 2006 requesting the CoR to
draft an opinion on the consequences of regional policy on EU cohesion;

HAVING REGARD TO the decision of its President of 1 June 2006 to instruct its Commission for Terri-
torial Cohesion Policy to draw up an opinion on this subject;

HAVING REGARD TO its Opinion on the Communication from the Commission to the Council and the Euro-
pean Parliament: Building our Common Future: Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means of the Enlarged Union 2007-
2013 COM(2004) 101 final (CdR 162/2004 fin) (1);

HAVING REGARD TO its opinion on the Third Report on Economic and Social Cohesion (CdR 120/
2004 fin) (2);

HAVING REGARD TO its Opinion on the Communication from the Commission Cohesion Policy in
(CdR
Support of Growth and Job Community Strategic Guidelines, 2007-2013 COM(2005) 299 final.
140/2005 fin);

HAVING REGARD TO its draft opinion (CdR 118/2006 rev. 2) adopted on 11 December 2006 by its
Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy (rapporteur: Mr Manuel Chaves González (PES/ES) — Presi-
dent of the Region of Andalusia);

adopted the following opinion at its 69th plenary session, held on 23 March 2007:

1. Socio-economic and political background to the opinion

tion. This report is primarily concerned with the underestimate
of the effects of cohesion policy implied in these earlier propo-
sals.

1.1
On 24 March 2006, in a letter signed by Commissioner
Wallström, the European Commission stated that it would be
interested in the Committee of
the Regions drawing up an
outlook opinion on The leverage effect of European Cohesion
Policy under the Structural Funds. The Commission is of the
view that
the Committee's opinion will make a substantial
contribution to the Fourth Report on Cohesion, which is due to
be adopted in Spring 2007.

Europe is currently experiencing huge socio-economic
1.4
changes and technological challenges that are central to the
main objective of the 2000 Lisbon Agenda, maintaining and
developing a European model able to combine prosperity and
solidarity. Europe can do this only by keeping a robust policy
framework which provides actors with instruments not only to
seize new opportunities but also to deal with the repercussions.

The Committee of

the Regions also received a letter,
1.2
dated 20 July, from the President of the European Parliament,
Mr Josep Borrell, asking the CoR to deliver an opinion on the
report by the MEP Ms Francisca Pleguezuelos Aguilar (ES/PES), a
member of Parliament's REGI Committee, on the repercussions
of structural policy for cohesion in the EU. The COTER
Commission decided that this outlook opinion would also meet
the request from Parliament.

1.5
The regions and local communities are among the most
exposed to these challenges but are also the best-positioned to
translate strategic policy orientations into concrete actions,
capable of mobilising social and economic actors across Europe.

This opinion attempts to contribute to the debate on the
1.3
future of cohesion policy in an enlarged Europe and its role in
the Union's budget. In the Committee's view, a number of past
proposals have questioned the effectiveness of cohesion policy
in a European Union in need of reform as a result of enlarge-
ment and which is deeply involved in the process of globalisa-

(1) OJ C 164, 5.7.2005, p. 4.
(2) OJ C 318, 22.12.2004, p. 1.

1.6
The renewed EU strategy for growth and jobs can, there-
fore, succeed only if it is able to mobilise its resources in all of
the Union's territories. Both EU and national budgets are under
pressure, however, and Europe must, therefore, attempt to find
the best way of increasing the financial resources available. The
CoR considers that, because of
its strategic orientation and
delivery mechanisms, cohesion policy is an effective lever at the
Union's disposal.

7.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 156/3

1.7
This opinion will attempt to bring a range of elements to
the debate, giving broad consideration to the leverage effect,
taking account of a number of impacts that cohesion policy has
throughout the Union. The methodological appendix contains
the information necessary to understand the scientific metho-
dology and the working dynamics used by the Committee in
drawing up this opinion (3).

2. Attempted definition of the leverage effect

In this opinion, the CoR proposes adopting a broad concept of
the leverage effect, which takes account of a range of factors
that are important for assessing the impact of the Structural
Funds. Consequently, and in an attempt to be comprehensive,
the opinion will aim to take account of
the leverage effect
provided by Community funds, covering the following areas:

— Financial aspects

— Political and strategic aspects of thematic concentration

— Institutional capacity building

— Increasing cohesion in Europe.

2.1 Financial aspects of the leverage effect

2.1.1
Cohesion policy offers considerable added value at
European level, since Community expenditure helps to achieve
better results and to secure the support of stakeholders more
effectively than expenditure at the national or regional
levels.
According to European Commission's estimates (4), every euro
spent at EU level by cohesion policy leads to further expenditure
If we consider
in Objective 1 regions, averaging 0,9 euros.
Objective 2 regions, the average additional expenditure gener-
ated rises to 3 euros for every euro invested.

This multiplier effect is a result firstly of the thematic
2.1.2
and geographical concentration of the Structural Funds. The
concentration of the Funds, in conjunction with a reasonable set
of instruments, increases the chances of achieving the necessary
critical mass, thus making it possible to generate further invest-
ment at a later date. The capacity for attracting investment can
thus be increased through thematic and geographical concentra-
tion, because this means that investment can be made with
lower costs.

2.1.3
Secondly, a leverage effect is also created as a result of
the wide variety of financing instruments available, even though
Member States and regions are often unable to make the best
use of all the measures potentially available under cohesion
policy. The study referred to in this opinion identified the global
grant, for example, as a flexible instrument that can create and

(3) http://coropinions.cor.europa.eu/CORopinionDocument.aspx?identi-
fier=cdr\coter-iv\dossiers\cotter-iv-003\cdr118-2006_fin_ac.doc&lan-
guage=EN

(4) European Commission: COM(2005) 299. Cohesion Policy in Support
of Growth and Jobs: Community Strategic Guidelines, 2007-2013,
Brussels, 5 July 2005.

enhance the financial
programmes.

leverage effect of many projects and

for example.

2.1.4
Other instruments that could be used to promote the
leverage effect are those derived from the Structural Funds'
involvement in financial engineering instruments for businesses,
especially SMEs, such as risk-capital funds, guarantee funds, loan
funds and urban development funds,
In many
eligible regions considerable experience has been built up of
these support instruments, particularly in the area of risk capital
finance,
in the course of implementing the Structural Funds.
The same is true of the development of revolving funds, which
can make a contribution to regional development beyond the
funding period. Welcome in this context are the JEREMIE,
JASPERS and JESSICA initiatives, promoted by the European
Investment Bank (EIB) and the European Investment Fund (EIF),
among others, which could play a significant role in imple-
menting this type of measure.

2.1.5
This type of instrument can also increase public autho-
rities' capacity for cooperating with the international financial
institutions and with the private banking sector, which can act
as sources of financing for other development projects. Other
potential advantages of using these instruments are the greater
flexibility that they can bring to management of the Structural
Funds and greater solvency when dealing with the external
agents provided by the EIB and the EIF.

the

effect

leverage

increased by
can be
2.1.6
Lastly,
improving a range of
factors concerned with strengthening
public-private partnerships. Being able to identify obstacles that
put off private investors and setting up and supporting project
teams and partnerships with the private sector are crucial
factors for generating private investment in relatively short time-
frames.

its

stable

Because of

financing and multiannual
2.1.7
programming, cohesion policy also ensures the possibility of
developing solid relationships with the private sector, which has
the potential to generate greater investment over a longer period
of time. This defining feature of cohesion policy in relation to
national policies of the same type is certainly a new and addi-
tional source of added value that should not be ignored.

2.1.8
This point should be set in context; in some Member
States, especially the ten new Member States, a sharp increase in
public investment might jeopardise their meeting the deficit
criterion and the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact in the
short and medium term. Greater use of public-private partner-
ships (PPP) might be a valid alternative solution to a direct
increase in public investment.

C 156/4

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.7.2007

2.2 Strategic Policy Orientation

2.3 Institutional Capacity building

2.2.1
Public investment must be carefully defined and prop-
erly planned at all levels. It is therefore important to emphasise
that cohesion policy has a key role to play in organising regional
and national priorities in such a way as to create synergy at the
European level. It goes without saying that a European invest-
ment strategy must be matched by corresponding national and
regional policies that should result in high-quality public invest-
ment, above all in areas relating to the Lisbon Strategy and its
links to the Gothenburg strategy.

2.3.1
Another aspect of leverage in the implementation of
the Structural Funds worth highlighting is their effect on the
way in which civil services operate, in other words, modernising
improving their management and harmonising their
them,
procedures
in the European context. Cohesion policy has
supported the implementation of Community policies, especially
environmental protection and equal opportunities, as well as
economic and social restructuring, in line with the priorities set
out in the Lisbon and Gothenburg strategies.

2.2.2
This investment concerns education, knowledge, inno-
vation and research, environmental protection, social services,
lifelong learning and the establishment of European bodies. This
investment not only affects demand; it also has long-term struc-
tural effects on the economy, increasing economic growth and
making the regions more competitive. The leverage effect
created by cohesion policy is thus caused by a number of
different factors.

First of all, by the Member States and regions incorpor-
2.2.3
ating new ideas and approaches into policies,
to
promote innovation in economic development. The case studies
that have been analysed lead to the conclusion that cohesion
policy has focused national policy priorities on areas that are
important to economic growth, such as innovation, research
and active policies to improve employment and social inclusion.

in order

2.2.4
This focus has developed in particular as a result of the
opportunity provided by the Funds to launch pilot projects,
with new approaches and instruments, such as cluster policies
for
innovation or more participatory approaches. This has
helped to raise awareness and to broaden the scope of the ‘inno-
vation’ concept, more successfully incorporating aspects relating
to organisation, finances, management, training and promoting
innovation into regional development strategies.

2.2.5
Secondly, cohesion policy has led to account being
taken of political areas that were previously overlooked by
national or regional policies. A number of pilot-projects such as
the Regional Innovation Strategies (RIS) and the ERDF's Innova-
tive Actions have gradually established themselves as key
national and regional policies. Broadly speaking, the most flex-
ible and market-focused approaches have been the common
denominator for the new approaches introduced by cohesion
policy.

2.3.2
In this regard, it is worth highlighting the implementa-
tion of the National Reform Plans as key elements for achieving
the aims of the Renewed Lisbon Strategy and the necessary
coordination between these and the National Strategic Reference
Frameworks 2007-2013.

2.3.3 Mention should also be made of promoting partner-
ships, improving institutional capacity for designing and imple-
menting public policies and extending the culture of evaluation,
transparency and exchanging good practice. These factors all
form part of the system developed in the European Union for
cohesion policy,
thus helping to improve governance at all
levels, because authorities then apply many of these approaches
in other sectors. The creation of new bodies, such as the
Regional Development Agencies, has also played a key develop-
ment role in many of the Union's regions.

2.3.4
Cohesion policy has also made a substantial contribu-
tion to the drafting of plans and programmes in this area. There
is an ever greater emphasis on rigorous diagnosis and analysis,
objectives are drawn up with greater precision and plans and
programmes are better supervised and evaluated, with bench-
marking becoming standard practice. Designing long-term stra-
tegies for public investment has become a common feature of
today's planning culture.

2.3.5
This has also increased Member States' capacity for
adopting and effectively implementing Community legislation in
a number of areas, such as the environment. In particular, cohe-
sion policy has led to major changes in public procurement law
in the Member States, opening up public markets to all EU
companies and making access to them easier, thereby strength-
ening the single market. This aspect warrants particular consid-
eration in the light of the recent rounds of EU enlargement.

Lastly,

the joint national and regional development
2.2.6
strategies that make up cohesion policy have promoted the
adoption of more strategic approaches to economic develop-
ment and employment, which has in turn helped to implement
concrete projects. A number of areas, such as technology, inno-
vation, the development of human capital, equal opportunities
and the environment were identified as important factors for
growth and built into the relevant polices to achieve a more
integrated approach.

Lastly,

2.3.6
the European Union's cohesion policy has
promoted and strengthened the role of the regions in the deci-
sion-making process when drawing up and implementing Com-
munity regional policies. Achieving critical mass in human
terms to ensure the sound management of the Funds has helped
to secure greater autonomy for local and regional authorities
and a real increase in regionalisation and local autonomy in the
European Union.

7.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 156/5

2.4 Cohesive building of Europe

2.4.1
Cohesion policy has also had a leverage effect on
building a more cohesive Europe, as the result of a number of
different factors.

3.1
As a result of its specific features (partnership, addition-
ality, strategic programming and multiannual funding), EU cohe-
sion policy has had a number of significant
impacts and
leverage effects.

2.4.2
Firstly, the principle of partnership and the active role
played by leaders has encouraged cooperation between public
institutions and the different sectors of society which has played
a key role in finding solutions to problems.

EU cohesion policy is a lever for financial pooling and
3.2
public private partnership.
for national
public and private funding in different sectors, due to its
funding stability over a multiannual programming period and
its capacity to mobilise a critical funding mass.

It acts as a catalyst

2.4.3
Secondly, cohesion policy has helped to find multi-
dimensional solutions to highly complex and diverse problems.
The problems affecting the EU's different regions are undoubt-
edly varied and the conditions and economic situations diverse.
Nevertheless, cohesion policy has led to account being taken of
this diversity, especially in the Union's peripheral regions,
in
those lagging furthest behind and in its outermost regions. This
cohesive approach has also had a marked effect on other
Member State policies.

Cohesion policy has thus helped to create the appro-
2.4.4
priate conditions for cooperation between EU regions and local
authorities, mainly through the Interreg initiative, which has
helped to settle longstanding disputes or past rifts across the
two sides of a border. Moreover, cooperation between municipa-
lities and regions without a common border has developed
strongly as a result of the promotion of interregional coopera-
tion and today it makes a not insignificant contribution to the
development of new regional strategies.

In previous Structural Fund periods,

2.4.5
the close link
between the EFRD and the EAGGF brought about considerable
leverage effects in relation to integrated rural development. With
a view to achieving the objective of territorial cohesion, the link
between the EFRD and EAFRD must be continued at least at the
level of coordination and cooperation.

2.4.6
The effects of the Urban programmes have been parti-
cularly significant in this regard: they have had a real impact in
terms of both physical regeneration and social inclusion, and
they have both effectively demonstrated the added value of
European policy to citizens and boosted effectiveness by concen-
trating actions.

2.4.7
Lastly, cohesion policy has had a crucial multiplier
effect on the profile of European integration. This effect has
been all
the greater because cohesion policy has helped to
improve public services and the quality of life.

This leverage effect and other cohesion policy impacts
region and in a great variety of
in all

3.3
occur
programmes and projects, irrespective of the project's cost.

types of

It should also be pointed out that the Funds' manage-
3.4
ment must be simplified,
in order to maximise partnerships'
leverage effect. Furthermore, keeping eligible areas small and
fragmented can hamper partnership cooperation in some
regions, which has a major impact on the selection and commit-
ment of partners. This problem will however be resolved in the
2007-2013 period, in which the new regulations have set out
to abandon the present Objective 2 zoning.

3.5
EU cohesion policy is a lever for strategic policy orienta-
tion. It has the capacity and the potential to generate innovative
approaches in different fields and to guide a large number of
policies at national, regional and local level. Cohesion policy is a
driving force, effectively linking the process of setting ambitious
common EU objectives, such as the Lisbon strategy, with their
successful acceptance and delivery by key players across the EU.

3.6
EU cohesion policy also acts as an instrument to lever
resources to give decisive support to measures directly related to
the Lisbon agenda, based on R&D and innovation, which are
critical factors for growth in the medium and long term.

factor

A critical

in the success of

3.7
the innovative
programmes and projects kick-started by cohesion policy is that
‘new concepts and approaches’ are accepted at the highest poli-
tical and administrative levels. The coherence of strategies and
collaboration between administrations are equally important.
These factors have stimulated the leverage effect of the Struc-
tural Funds.

3. Conclusions

In the light of the factors that have been studied, the Committee
of the Regions wishes to state that:

EU cohesion policy has significant effects on institutional
3.8
capacity building. Applying the partnership principle,
it has
promoted a new model of collaborative governance throughout
the EU, strategically involving the different levels of government
and civil society, thus ensuring greater social and economic
capital in the regions and local authorities. This will be a critical
factor for development in the new Member States.

C 156/6

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

7.7.2007

identity. There must

3.9
In order to maximise the long-term leverage effect of the
Structural Funds, account must be taken of a region's general
context and its cultural
therefore also
always be a balanced relationship between EU-wide require-
ments and regional priorities. Attempting to change the culture
and mindset of a given society, by promoting innovation, educa-
tion, the entrepreneurial spirit and creativity, guarantees that the
changes potentially generated by the Structural Funds will be
lasting.

3.10
EU cohesion policy is a lever for the cohesive building
of Europe. It has the potential to integrate various types of terri-
tory across Europe, allows for
the active participation of
economic and social stakeholders and is visible and perceived to
be inclusive by European citizens because of its tangible contri-
bution to improving the quality of life.

3.11
Cohesion policy also provides leverage for sustainable
growth that respects the environment, preventing its neglect
from becoming a factor that limits growth, as well as the quality
of life and conservation of natural resources.

Because it covers

3.12
the entire EU, cohesion policy
provides a suitable continent-wide framework for ensuring
balanced economic and social development. Addressing both
convergence and competitiveness factors, it creates the essential
conditions for pooling experience and exchanging best practice.
Furthermore,
it ensures a complete and integrated framework
that consolidates mutual learning, and ensures financing and the
replication of successful initiatives through practical implemen-
tation methods.

3.13
The CoR considers that the leverage effect of EU cohe-
sion policy can be significantly reinforced in the 2007-2013
programming period. The tried and tested principles underpin-
ning cohesion policy have been complemented by a number of
measures: the adoption of a more strategic approach for cohe-
sion policy, earmarking and a greater concentration of funds in
priority sectors, an improved legal
framework for adopting
innovative financing schemes, the attachment of due importance
to urban development programmes and upgrading territorial
cooperation. These changes have confirmed that, when funda-
mental EU policy shifts occur, cohesion policy can play a central
role in giving practical inspiration and support to economic and
social change throughout the EU.

The development and selection of projects has been
3.14
identified as a key factor for success: the type of instrument
must be chosen carefully to ensure the best match for the
regional context and the objectives to be achieved.

4. Recommendations

The Committee of the Regions:

4.1
Recommends that the European Commission incorporate
the concept of leverage into its forthcoming evaluation of the
current state and progress of cohesion policy.

Suggests that the European Commission, the European
4.2
Parliament and the Council consider the leverage effect as an
appropriate framework for evaluating EU policies, in particular
as regards the mid-term review of the Community budget.

4.3
Recommends that the European Commission step up its
efforts to raise awareness of cohesion policy and its benefits,
profile and image in all Member States and in particular in local
and regional authorities.

Recommends that the European Commission build on
4.4
the work already undertaken to promote different
financial
instruments under the Structural Funds (JEREMIE, JESSICA, etc.)
and in particular create the necessary competition law arrange-
ments for the development of risk capital funds and guarantee
programmes in the regions.

4.5
Recommends that the European Commission and the
Member States cut red tape, establish a legal, administrative and
financial
innovative activity and
facilitates
stimulate specific forms of funding for innovative companies
(including risk-capital, business angels, micro-credit, etc.).

framework that

Recommends that the European Commission and the
4.6
Member States evaluate progress on simplification and decentra-
lisation of
the management of the Structural Funds for the
period 2007-2013. In particular, it is recommended that par-
ticular attention be paid to ensuring proportionality between
administrative costs and the type and scale of the measure and
to the consequences of the administrative costs for local and
regional authorities.

4.7
Recommends that the Member States strengthen partner-
ships at all stages of the governance and management of the
Structural Funds, putting into practice effective ways of invol-
ving regional and local authorities and civil society throughout
the process, and recommends a thorough-going partnership
with cities on account of their potential as drivers of growth
and employment.

4.8
Recommends that the European Commission, Parliament,
the Member States and the EIB clearly identify the obstacles that
are keeping investors away from engaging with PPPs co-funded
by the Structural Funds. Clear interpretation at EU level of PPP
agreements and simplification of state aids regulation would
thus be of considerable help. Disseminating knowledge about
the potential benefits and problems of PPP among regional and
local authorities is also needed.

7.7.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 156/7

4.9
Recommends that the European Commission and the
Member States safeguard the experimental and pioneering role
often played by the Structural Funds. In this respect strongly
the Member States use the performance
recommends that
reserves and other instruments to reward and expand the most
successful strategies and to consolidate the results of territorial
cooperation.

Calls on the European Commission to respect the close
4.10
link between Structural Fund measures and the rural develop-
ment programmes, and to facilitate and promote optimum
alignment and coordination of content at every level —
notwithstanding the need for clearly separated accounts.

4.11
Recommends that particular attention be paid when
implementing the Structural Funds to the goals set out in the
Kyoto Protocol and that everyone concerned stays on track
towards sustainable growth in a way that respects the environ-
ment.

4.12
Recommends that the Member States and the Commis-
sion promote the leverage effect when programming the Struc-
tural Funds so as to encourage the generation, stimulation and
funding of projects with a considerable leverage effect, and
when drawing up reports and in the evaluation cycle.

4.13
Notes the need also to consider particular regional
features at all levels in relation to future cohesion policy, given
that ‘strength in diversity’ is a key to the success of the leverage
effect of cohesion policy.

Recommends that,

in order to take full advantage of
4.14
the leverage effect of
the Structural Funds, the regions and
Member States be rigorous in establishing adequate coherence

Rome, 23 March 2007.

between regional strategies, National Reform Plans, National
Strategic Reference Frameworks and Operational Programmes
implemented under European cohesion policy.

4.15
Suggests addressing the benefits of the leverage effect
and working on improving public awareness of the potential
benefits through both specialised and large-scale publicity activ-
ities and on disseminating good practice, as the Committee of
the Regions does through its Open Days.

4.16
Recommends that the Commission study and measure
long-term development in the regions, focusing on the fact that
changes in their culture and mindset, along with public commu-
nication that is transparent in every respect and is easy for all
stakeholders to understand, are needed to ensure that these
regions make real progress on their social and economic devel-
opment.

4.17 Welcomes the initiative of the European Commission to
establish ‘Regions for Economic Change’ networks and recom-
mends a broad thematic range in order to reflect different terri-
torial dynamics of change, making use of innovations produced
during the current period and which should actively involve
local and regional authorities in the process of selecting the
initiative's priority fields and expects to be fully involved in the
development of this initiative.

4.18
Recommends that the European Institutions adopt the
approach of solidarity between territories as a fundamental
dimension of
the concept of EU cohesion. Cohesion policy
must continue to be a central element of European integration
policy.

The President

of the Committee of the Regions

Michel DELEBARRE