Brussels, 12/05/2016 (Agence Europe) - As negotiations on the urban agenda advance, the role of the member states is becoming increasingly significant - a trend along with which seems to come a weakening of the broad thrust of urban policy and a weakening of the role of the European Commission, much to the chagrin of the regions, according a source consulted on Thursday 12 May.
While the second draft of the Pact of Amsterdam seemed to be much to the satisfaction of local and regional players (see EUROPE 11505), the member states have gradually taken over the issue (see EUROPE 11545). Their influence has been particularly felt since the fifth version of the Pact, confirmed in the sixth - and certainly penultimate - version.
The very title of the document illustrates the shift, morphing from “EU Urban Agenda” to “Urban Agenda for the EU”. “The member states felt that the original title put the emphasis on the European dimension, whereas the latest version brought urban policy back within the intergovernmental realm”, a European source told us.
Following on perfectly logically from these adjustments is a weakening of the role of the European Commission, which will not ultimately have responsibility for coordinating urban policy, contrary to what some local and regional players would have liked (see EUROPE 11538). The Commission is also asked to consider putting in place a “one-stop shop” for urban policy issues to ensure consistency of information provided. “We would prefer that the Commission be asked to put this in place rather than simply give it consideration”, the same source went on to say, indicating that, were there to be no one-stop shop, urban policy would less effective.
More generally, it is the broad thrust of the urban agenda that seems to have been gradually eroded. The section devoted to better regulation starts that the urban agenda will not generate new legislation and should be viewed as an informal contribution in the preparation and review of the future policy. From a narrow interpretative point of view, the document, as it currently stands, limits the scope solely to territorial cohesion, “the effect of which will be to reduce the cross-cutting nature of this instrument which was supposed to impinge on all European policy areas which affect urban areas”.
A further source of concern for local and regional players is how regularly ministers will meet to discuss urban issues - extended to every 18 months in the latest version, we are told. “This is a point added by the next two Presidencies of the Council of the EU (Slovakia and Malta), which have only a passing interest in urban policy”, explained a source close to the matter.
The only relatively positive point is the partial removal of the “voluntary” dimension of participation in the future EU urban policy. Only participation in partnerships remains voluntary. Pilot partnerships, however, have failed to generate much interest among the member states (see EUROPE 11538). In the view of a number of regional players, the effect of making urban policy a voluntary exercise would be to deny the initial objective, “which sought binding involvement at all levels of governance”.
The Dutch, at the helm of this project as part of their chairing the Council of the EU, find themselves somewhat isolated on this issue, according to an institutional source. The Netherlands is a heavily urbanised country, unlike few other member states, particularly those of Central and Eastern Europe for which the priority remains the socio-economic differences between rural and urban areas. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)