Brussels, 09/05/2012 (Agence Europe) - The regions are preparing for the eventuality of economic macro-conditionality, albeit flexible to meet their wishes. This was stated on Tuesday 8 May, during a public hearing of the parliamentary committee on regional development (REGI). Four associations representing towns and regions also set out their preferences regarding thematic concentration, partnership contracts and urban development. Nonetheless, generally speaking, they follow the approach adopted by the various rapporteurs on the legislative package proposed by the Commission, which revises cohesion policy for the next programming period 2014-2020.
Flexible macro-conditionality. Constanze Krehl (S&D, Germany), the rapporteur on the Common Strategic Framework (CSF) for five structural funds, takes the view that the article on economic macro-conditionality (allowing payments to be suspended if a member state fails to meet the requirements of the Stability and Growth Pact) must be removed. The regions would prefer such a solution but, if conditionality is maintained, then they recommend three modus operandi. Firstly, Jean Yves Le Drian, President of the Conference of Peripheral Maritime Regions (CPMR), explained that suspension should solely concern financial commitments and not payments, which would prevent the mechanism from penalising projects already underway. Secondly, the Commission should work with the structural fund management authorities in the event of partnership contracts and operational programmes being modified. And finally, a ceiling should be set for the amounts that could be suspended based on the GDP of the state concerned. Constanze Krehl, however, does not seem willing to make her position more flexible, reiterating her determination to see any reference to macro-conditionality deleted from the future regulations, and convinced she will be backed by Parliament on this.
Indicative thematic concentration. On behalf of the Assembly of European Regions (AER), Michèle Sabban spoke of thematic concentration (11 objectives under EU 2020 strategy), which is not fundamentally incompatible with the interests of the regions. She said, however, that it would be better for thematic concentration to be indicative in nature, so that the regions maintain a margin of manoeuvre for adapting investment to their specific needs. Partnership contracts, she said, should contain what best corresponds to specific regional realities.
Multi-level governance. Carola Gunnarson, speaking for the Council of European Municipalities and Regions (CEMR), also argued for stronger multi-level governance. To achieve this, she said, the local and regional authorities should be treated as member states' partners, and not likened to other types of organisations. The towns do no wish to be left out. Although 5% of funding is to be allocated to sustainable, integrated urban development, Paul Tilsley, on behalf of Eurocities, stresses that this is “really a minimum”. Finally, he trusts that towns receiving funding may not be chosen in an arbitrary manner but according to a list of criteria. That is a position that will no doubt be defended by the rapporteurs at a later date. (MD/transl.jl)