During the first discussions on the draft directive at the regional development committee (REGI) on Thursday 27 September, introducing the mechanism to resolve legal and administrative obstacles in a cross-border context, the European Parliament’s rapporteur, Matthijs van Miltenburg (ALDE, Netherlands) argued that the proposal should be made slightly more flexible in order to align it more effectively with the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality.
At the end of May the European Commission presented a proposal (see EUROPE 12029) containing the suggestions made by the Luxembourg Presidency of the Council in 2015 for introducing a new instrument to substantially simplify cross-border projects. This regulation would therefore allow, on a voluntary basis and in agreement with the competent authorities, the regulation of a member state to apply in a neighbouring member state as part of a specific project for a limited period of time. The mechanism would involve the conclusion of a European cross-border agreement that would be directly applicable or a European cross-border declaration demanding an additional legislative procedure in the member state.
The rapporteur supports the Commission's basic proposal but is highlighting its voluntary nature and the fact that each member state can promote already existing mechanisms on a case-by-case basis. The MEP would also like to extend the assessment procedure ahead of the conclusions of the agreements and declarations, in order to take the complex nature of the different situations better into account.
During the discussions, Lambert van Nistelrooij (EPP, Netherlands), spoke on behalf of the shadow rapporteur, Joachim Zeller (EPP, Germany) and asked whether they should not slow down the pace, in an effort to consult the different actors on the ground and comprehend the difficulties created by the proposal. He particularly highlighted the period available for the actors approving the new instruments which, according to estimates provided, would be between four and five years.
Mirosław Piotrowski (ECR, Poland) said that he was concerned that the rules of a country would be de facto imposed on other member states, due to the balance of forces in favour of the former. The MEP provided the example of cooperation between Germany and Poland, in which Germany had the advantage in cooperation projects. Other MEPs had questions regarding the way in which these new provisions would be applied with third countries.
The Commission pointed out that the proposal “was not coming out of nowhere” but had been the result of a lengthy consultation with the member states and stakeholders since 2015. The Commission's representative considered that the concerns expressed by Mr Piotrowski were rather unrealistic. The Commission explained that the proposal only affected the member states because it aimed, above all, to improve the way in which the internal market functioned.
Mr van Miltenburg will present the details of his draft report on 15 October. The MEP also indicated that he wanted to organise a hearing, not as part of the committee but by through his party, the ALDE. (Original version in French by Pascal Hansens)