Brussels, 12/07/2011 (Agence Europe) - Cohesion policy is a policy for development, and one that is vital to implementation of the EU 2020 strategy. It must be a results-based policy of efficiency. The opening of negotiations on cohesion policy rules is essential. A draft regulation on cohesion policy objectives is expected from the Commission in September 2011, allowing discussions to begin on the shape that cohesion policy should take after 2020. The Polish and future Danish and Cypriot Presidencies of the Council of the EU would like the issue of the regulation to be settled by the end of the year. If the Commission does not submit its response in September, however, the Polish Presidency will not be able to define its position, explained Polish Regional Development Minister El¿bieta Bieñkowska, as she set out the Polish Presidency priorities for the European Parliament (EP) regional development committee on Tuesday 12 July. Although rumours are circulating that funding is to be allocated to programmes, not to member states, nothing is certain, she said.
Bieñkowska also detailed for the press some of the other Polish Presidency European cohesion policy priorities: the territorial approach which is of importance because the Presidency wants to structure future programmes so that account can be taken of the specific and peculiar nature of the regions in the EU, European connection funds, urban issues, transition regions and the structure of operational programmes.
EP position with regard to Presidency priorities: chairwoman of the EP regional development committee Danuta Hübner (EPP, Poland) welcomed the Presidency priorities: “Cohesion policy will be a response to the crisis.” A strong point for the Presidency, this policy has proved its worth: in difficult times, it has stimulated growth. Its expenditure goes into innovation, a sector whose funding is the first to be frozen by governments in times of crisis! The EP expects the Presidency to be “very active” in three areas on which negotiations will be held: the budget, regulations and negotiations in various member states on the programmes and priorities for after 2013, Hübner added.
During the debate in committee earlier in the morning, MEPs set out their expectations and called on the Polish Presidency to make sure it shares with everyone its excellent practices which ensured good use of European funding in Poland. Hübner said that the committee had: (1) called for it to be ensured that the Commission brings forward its draft regulation within two months (that is, by September) - there is no reason for any delay; (2) rejected any approach which would mean that cohesion policy would have to await the drafting of draft regulations in other policy areas; (3) called for the new cohesion policy to be implemented from 2014. MEPs shared concerns over new instruments, namely “Connecting Europe” which will be managed centrally and will focus on transport and energy projects. MEPS feel that this is a new approach which will have to be carefully assessed.
Hubnër said, too, that conditionality could be something that might strengthen cohesion policy. “We don't want conditionality linked to macroeconomic indicators as part of the stability and growth pact. The proposals made by the Polish Presidency suggest that if we address the most difficult problems, namely that, on the programmes, work should be completed before the end of 2011. Now that's a positive approach!” Hübner, the spokeswoman for MEPs called for “Polish Prime Minister and current Council President Donald Tusk to be present at the General Affairs Council on 16 December 2001, which will be devoted more or less exclusively to cohesion policy”. She said: “We are going to bring pressure to bear on the Commission to bring forward its new regulation to the EP and the Council so that it can, we hope, be adopted in September”
Exchange of views. Jan Olbrycht (EPP, Poland) wanted to know when work would begin in earnest on the regulations. Wojciech Oljeniczak (S&D, Poland) asked whether some of the member states might impose restrictions on the Council - while pointing out with regard to the legislative package that the ball is in the Council's court and that, consequently, the Presidency programme cannot be completed by September. Elisabeth Schroedter (Greens/EFA, Germany) wondered how a common position in the Council might be reached. To all of these, Bieñkowska repeated that, if no response was forthcoming from the Commission, the Presidency could not define its position. Possible options in terms of categories of intermediate regions could not be second guessed. She stated that the member states had tabled a number of different, sometimes contradictory, positions. She said regions with GDPs of between 200% and 90% of the EU average were going to be compared. However, if those with GDPs of between 75% and 90% of the average were compared, it had to be acknowledged that there would be regions which had always been in this category and others which had come into it. Hence the difficulty. In several countries, there are regions, including capitals, whose GDP is more than 75% of the EU average, while other regions continue to need aid, Bieñkowska said. In conclusion, she stated: “What the Presidency wants is for the regions to participate in the contract prepared by the Commission”. (G.B./transl.rt)