Brussels, 04/03/2016 (Agence Europe) - The second version of the Pact of Amsterdam drawn up by the Dutch Presidency of the Council of the EU, that has been circulating since 2 March, is described as more 'ambitious' and 'political' than the first, which seems to please cities and regions.
The seven-page document seen by this newsletter also gives details of the Urban Agenda, its scope of application, priority themes, operational framework and partnerships. A number of European sources say that the current version is more ambitious and more political than the first and the regions and cities see it as going in the right direction.
At the end of the preamble, a sentence has been added to leave the door open to future revisions and changes to the Pact, whereas the first version simply said that urban policy was based on “existing European platforms, programmes and policies.”
Moreover, in the preamble, the new version mentions the concept of urban-proofing, in other words better adaptation of European policies to urban areas, whether in terms of legislation, financing instruments or information exchange systems. The concept was not mentioned in the first version.
Likewise, while the first version indicated in its objectives: “The EU Urban Agenda strives to improve coordination of EU and national policies with a clear impact on urban areas,” the new version says, on the contrary: “The EU Urban Agenda strives to establish a more integrated approach to EU and national policies and legislation with a clear impact on Urban Areas.” A source commented that this is not simply a change of wording, but involves a change of approach in the legislative and decision-making process.
The term 'urban areas' replaces the term 'cities' in Part VI, in line with the preferences of the Regional Policy Commissioner (see EUROPE 11488). The regions seem to approve of the change. They prefer the concept of 'functional zones' that include both rural and urban zones. A point that may also go in the direction of the member states, confirms a source, as the member states fear that such an agenda will result in funds initially earmarked for rural areas going to cities instead. Here, the role of the Committee of the Regions (CoR) is clearly highlighted, compared with the first version, because the body representing local and regional authorities at the EU is recognised as “an important voice of Urban Areas at EU level” to contribute to the Agenda's development.
The CoR's role seems to have been boosted overall. The figures indicated in the new preamble for the economic potential of urban areas come from opinions produced by the Committee of the Regions, and the CoR is explicitly mentioned as 'counsel' for the EU Urban Agenda. The boosting of the CoR's role in the Urban Agenda is, however, reported to be a matter of discussion for some since the body chaired by Markku Markkula is above all representative of the regions rather than cities as such. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)