Brussels, 25/09/2013 (Agence Europe) - With less than a month to go until the plenary vote on cohesion reform, a number of crucial political questions still remain blocked. Macro-economic conditionality, performance reserve, co-funding and financial advances continue to poison the negotiations going on at the inter-institutional trilogue. The planned date of this reform was at the end of October, but this is looking increasingly unlikely.
At the end of the seventh meeting on Tuesday evening 24 September, a solution on these three dossiers was still not in sight and they remain pending, much to the regret of the European Commissioner for Cohesion Policy, Johannes Hahn. Speaking on Twitter, he urged the Council, the European Parliament and the Commission to make even more effort next week to obtain an agreement. The next trilogue meeting will take place on Wednesday 2 October.
In July, the Parliamentary committee for regional development had already voted for much of the reform on cohesion policy, on the basis of the agreements obtained at the trilogue meeting between the three institutions. Constanze Krehl (S&D, Germany), the rapporteur on the common strategic framework, explained on Tuesday 24 September in a REGI committee meeting that there was a possibility of including all the remaining elements that had, in the meantime, been the subject of compromise, into a single package. The vote on this could take place on 14 October during the REGI committee meeting, in view of voting on the reform during the plenary still planned for the week of 21 October.
This timetable, however, appears increasingly difficult to attain, given that no compromise appears in sight on these three political questions. Macro-economic conditionality (suspending European fund payments if the state does not accept EU micro-economic injunctions) remains the most sensitive issue. The European Parliament is still strongly opposed to this and would at least like to have its word during the lifting of payment suspensions. For the Council and Commission, however, this conditionality is key and this disagreement could undermine cohesion policy. The same scenario arises with regard to the performance reserve (5% of funds paid to those with the best performances in 2019). Matters are also blocked on the subject of co-funding and payment advance rates. Parliament would like to increase them but the Commission would prefer member states to contribute more in order to encourage better project management.
If the status quo persists, particularly with regard to micro-economic conditionality, a domino effect could be created with its subsequent impact on approving the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF 2014-2020), planned for 23 October. The absence of an agreement on sectoral provisions could also create a barrier to the MFF being adopted by the European Parliament. Krehl pointed out that this exerts extra pressure on the negotiating team. Co-rapporteur Lambert Van Nistelrooij (EPP, the Netherlands) indicated that the negotiating team did not intend to, “let things drag on”.
Cohesion reform, particularly the extremely difficult issue of macro-economic conditionality, is due to be debated by member states at the General Affairs Council on Monday 30 September. (MD/trans.fl)