Responsibility for cohesion
112. The European Community
Institutions and the national governments should fund cohesion
policies in a manner proportionate to their importance in relation
to the rest of the Budget (paragraph 34).
113. The Funds should
not be a vehicle for replacing the policies of the Member States
(paragraph 35).
Programming and partnership
114. The Government
should further improve the analysis of economic and social needs
based on local area statistics. The Government and the Commission
should be alert to the inconsistencies that arise where areas
are inappropriately aggregated (paragraph 46).
115. Each GOR should
be charged with producing, by mid-1998, after full consultation
with local authorities, including elected members, and the relevant
private organisations, a locally agreed structure for the strategic
planning of programmes, selecting projects and monitoring their
implementation (paragraph 47).
116. The arrangements
for coordination between Whitehall departments in handling Structural
Funds should be further improved so that the position in England
is at least as good as in Scotland. Devolution to regional level
of decisions about structural policies and their funding should
be carried further to maximise the potential benefits of the Structural
Funds (paragraph 48).
117. Councillors should
decide for themselves whether it is more appropriate for their
council to be represented on Monitoring Committees by an officer
or a member. This matter should now be settled amicably and promptly
(paragraph 49).
118. Prompt action should
be taken to formulate an Objective 4 programme, agree it with
the Commission and implement it (paragraph 50).
Additionality
119. The requirement
for additionality should be maintained and national governments
should make every effort to demonstrate, not only to the Commission
but also to the local citizens, that it has been met (paragraph
55).
120. The requirement
for additionality for Structural Fund programmes in countries
receiving support from the Cohesion Fund should be maintained
(paragraph 56).
Economic achievements
121. Member States and
CEECs seeking to join the EU should give a high priority to the
competence and probity of the civil administration (paragraph
77).
Funding issues
122. The EIB should
strike the right balance between legitimate caution and the inherent
risks in meeting obvious needs. The best possible combination
of loans and grants should be employed and the rate of return
from a project given due weight. In the CEECs the EIB should
work constructively with the EBRD and other banks in and out of
region to develop the most productive and innovative financing
mechanisms (paragraph 79).
123. The Government
should exert its influence within the Council and on the Commission
to prevent the use of state aids which harm enterprise in another
Member State. Structural measures should provide general support
for a regional economy rather than directly favouring individual
enterprises (paragraph 80).
124. Greater efforts
should be made to bring in market discipline and enhance private
sector involvement (paragraph 82).
Psychological effects
125. Strategy should
not be imposed from the "top down". Equally, strategy
should not be devised only from the "bottom up". Programmes
must be the result of partnership between national and sub-national
bodies, down to local communities, at the planning stage as well
as at the implementation stage (paragraph 86).
Basis for reform
126. To reduce bureaucracy
and delay there should be a radical reform of the administration
of the Funds. Changes should not be limited to minor tinkering
for fear of disturbing existing administrative empires (paragraph
89).
127. The reform should
be based on four policy principles:
-- continuity-building
on existing achievements;
-- concentration-on
the most needy;
-- complementarity-of
national and EU cohesion policies and actions; and
-- coherence-programmes
which integrate economic and social elements;
applied by processes which embody:
-- subsidiarity
within Member States-devolution to the lowest competent level;
-- solidarity-seeking
the common good, not pursuing parochialism;
-- simplification-of
administration; and
-- scrutiny-of
performance (paragraph 92).
128. The arrangements
for the operation of the Structural Funds for the period after
1999 must now be agreed as soon as possible. The Commission should
bring forward proposals for the reform of the Funds as a matter
of urgency-a Green Paper issued this year would not be too soon
(paragraph 93).
129. The number of Structural
Funds should be reduced. The Funds must fit together easily from
the users' point of view, avoiding compartmentalisation and a
tangle of over-lapping or conflicting rules on eligibility, funding
periods and monitoring and auditing requirements (paragraph 94).
130. Standards of co-ordination
between Government departments and of simplification of administration
should be raised throughout the United Kingdom. GORs should function
as Offices for all Government departments, not only those four
currently participating (paragraph 95).
131. The United Kingdom
government, and other national governments, where appropriate,
should reduce to a few days the time between funds being received
from the Commission and being paid out to promoters. Time targets
should be set, monitored and the results given to the Monitoring
Committees concerned (paragraph 96).
132. There should be
a significant reduction in the number of CIs and an elimination
of CIs that address issues which could more easily be tackled
through CFS or SPDs. CIs with potential for innovation and for
spreading best practice between Member States should be retained
for a limited period of trial after which they should be dis-continued
or brought into the main stream of policy (paragraph 97).
Enlargement and EMU
133. The assumptions
underlying Commissioner Wulf-Mathies' calculations about the costs
of continuing cohesion policy in the EU15, and giving substantially
increased aid to the CEECs, should be fully explained by the Commission,
so that their validity can be tested in open public discussion
(paragraph 102).
134. The proportion
of the EC Budget devoted to cohesion policies should be increased
beyond the present one third only to the extent that the proportion
going to support the CAP is reduced (paragraph 104).
Distribution of Funds within the
EU after 1999
135. In the reform of
the Funds after 1999 a substantial geographical concentration
is imperative. There should be further study of what economic
indicators of need should be used and within what geographic boundaries
measurements should be averaged when assessing economic and social
cohesion (paragraphs 52 and 106).
136. Spatially defined
regions eligible for aid should be large enough to have a degree
of economic cohesion and small enough to permit the identification
of pockets of deprivation within generally more prosperous areas
(paragraph 107).
137. There should be
a substantial concentration, or pruning, of themes or objectives
eligible for funding. Overriding considerations when determining
eligibility for projects should be increasing competitiveness,
increasing sustainable employment and adjusting skills to meet
changing labour market needs (paragraph 108).
138. When one of the
Cohesion countries joins EMU, Cohesion Fund assistance to that
country should be tapered off. Other Cohesion countries outside
EMU should continue to receive assistance from the Cohesion Fund
if their GDP per capita remains below 90 per cent of the
EU15 average (paragraph 109).
139. Consideration should
be given to adding to the Phare programme for each CEEC an element
particularly addressed to achieving balanced regional development
within that country. In the transitional period, while new Member
States enjoy various derogations, the EU's cohesion policies should
be applied with a ceiling so that the total in-flow of EU funds
should be no more than 4 per cent of the recipient country's GDP
(paragraph 110).
