51998IP0206

A4-0206/98

Resolution on regional planning and the European Spatial Development Perspective

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the first official draft of the European Spatial Development Perspective,

- having regard to its resolutions of 26 October 1990 on a concerted regional planning policy ((OJ C 295, 26.11.1990, p. 652.)), 16 September 1992 on a Community policy for regional planning: Europe 2000 ((OJ C 284, 2.11.1992, p. 75.)) and 29 June 1995 on the Commission document 'Europe 2000+, cooperation for European territorial development¨ ((OJ C 183, 17.7.1995, p. 36.)),

- having regard to the opinions by the Committee of the Regions on the subject,

- having regard to the conclusions of the informal meetings of Ministers responsible for regional policy and regional planning, and in particular the meeting in Glasgow on 8 June 1998,

- having regard to the first three-yearly report on cohesion, COM(96)0542,

- having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Policy (A4-0206/98),

A. whereas the mandate in Article 130b of the EC Treaty seeks to ensure that Community policies are coordinated with the national economic policies, with the aim of encouraging economic and social cohesion in order to promote the overall harmonious development of the Community,

B. whereas many Community policies, particularly the agricultural policy, the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund, the trans-European networks, policies to protect the environment and nature, and research and competition policies, have a direct impact on the regional distribution of human settlements and economic activity and thus affect the balanced development of the whole European area,

C. whereas the analytical work of the Commission, particularly Europe 2000 and Europe 2000+, shows that a number of problems persist and cannot be solved in a strictly national framework and points to the impact of the various Community policies on the equilibrium of the European territory; whereas the main contribution made by these documents was to combine a sectoral approach with an integrated view of the European territory,

D. whereas the three-yearly report on cohesion recently provided an analysis of the impact of the various Community policies on regional disparities in the Union, highlighting their frequent inconsistency and contradictory effects,

E. whereas its own previous positions have favoured the development of a Europe-wide regional planning policy, capable of ensuring that the various Community policies complement, and are consistent with, the aim of achieving balanced and sustainable development throughout the territory of the Union, thus strengthening its economic and social cohesion,

F. whereas an integrated and consistent regional planning strategy is also essential to improve the Union¨s competitiveness,

G. whereas the first official draft of the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP) is the political extension of analytical work previously done by the Commission; whereas it has the intrinsic value of being the result of the consensus between all the Member States within the Regional Development Committee,

H. whereas the basic objectives of the ESDP, namely economic and social cohesion, sustainable development and a balance between competition and cooperation throughout Europe, match Parliament¨s own priorities as stated in its previous resolutions,

I. whereas the European regions are extremely diverse, as is the very concept of regional planning in the various Member States,

J. whereas the ESDP is based on the principle of subsidiarity and hence on respect for the present allocation of responsibilities for this policy between the Community, national, regional and local spheres; whereas it is indicative by nature, not compulsory, just as its purpose is evolutionary,

K. whereas the drafting of the ESDP has highlighted the difficulties in obtaining data that are harmonized and comparable between the Member States; whereas these difficulties highlight the need to have a permanent structure that will provide analytical support for the final wording of the ESDP and its continual updating,

L. whereas it has previously come out in favour of the establishment of a European observatory for regional planning; whereas, further, the conclusions of the informal Councils of regional planning ministers have, since the meeting held in Leipzig in September 1994, expressed the support of the Member States for the establishment of such an observatory,

M. whereas the practical application of the ESDP is hampered by the institutional weakness arising from the absence in the Treaty of specific Community powers in this area, the informal nature of the Council of regional planning ministers and the temporary nature of the Regional Development Committee,

N. whereas the transnational and interregional spheres are priority and exemplary areas for Europe-wide regional planning activity; whereas there have been successes, but also difficulties, in implementing the Interreg A and C Initiative, and having regard to the proposal to consolidate this programme as part of the new generation of Community initiatives,

O. having regard to the activities in the field of interregional cooperation and regional planning which have been financed under Article 10 of the ERDF,

P. having regard to the reform of the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund currently under way and its effect on the application of the principles set out in the ESDP,

Q. having regard to the challenges posed by the forthcoming enlargement in the field of regional planning and to the activities of the Council of Europe in the field of regional planning and cross-border and interregional cooperation, in particular its Regional Planning Perspective and Charter and the Framework Convention on Transfrontier Cooperation by Local or Regional Authorities,

1. Welcomes the first official draft of the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP); considers it to have great political value as it is the result of consensus and cooperation between the Member States and, hence, a fundamental stage towards final adoption;

2. Fully agrees with the essential aims which the draft perspective attributes to regional planning: the pursuit of economic and social cohesion, sustainable development and balanced competitiveness throughout the European territory; considers, however, that it will be necessary to establish clearer guidelines and a methodology for coordination between the three aims;

3. Regrets that the Treaty does not at present provide for specific Community powers as regards regional planning, in view of the fact that many of its provisions imply and indeed require coordination of the effects of Community and national policies with a view to ensuring the harmonious, balanced and sustainable development of the Union¨s territory;

4. Considers that the ESPD must form an indicative and non-compulsory framework, that its application must be based on respect for the principle of subsidiarity and that it must be subject to a process of periodic revision and adjustment;

5. Takes the view that cooperation and consensus must form the basis of the practical application of the ESDP and, accordingly, considers it essential to incorporate the principle of partnership in drawing it up, revising it and implementing it;

6. Considers it essential to find ways in which the regional and local authorities can participate actively in the various development stages of the ESDP, particularly as the political will required for progress to be made in this area can only be sustained with the resolute support of the public;

7. Considers that there are no longer any possibilities for intergovernmental action and that it is therefore essential at the present stage to include regional planning in the Community sphere; accordingly, strongly urges the formalization of the Council of Regional Planning Ministers and the establishment of the Regional Development Committee as a permanent body, with a delegation representing members of Parliament's Committee on Regional Policy being invited to attend meetings of the Regional Development Committee;

8. Welcomes the fact that the conclusions of the ministerial seminar held in Echternach in December 1997 reflect the Member States¨ agreement on the need to take the draft Perspective into consideration at regional, national, cross-border, transnational and Community level, thus anticipating its implementation;

9. Considers that the Commission, in the exercise of its powers of legislative initiative and its executive powers, has immediate responsibility for and the opportunity of improving the complementarity and consistency of Community policies, in particular by establishing the internal mechanisms for coordination between its various departments and by incorporating a regional impact assessment in any measure that is adopted;

10. Considers that the current reform of the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund must make it possible to incorporate in the programming the principles and policy options defined in the ESDP; calls on the Commission to take them into account when determining the guidelines which should, in accordance with its legislative proposals, shape the way the programmes are drawn up;

11. Considers that the ESDP should provide the framework for giving more consistency to the Community policies which have a regional impact, so as to prevent those policies from hampering the promotion of social, economic and regional cohesion as well as of a sustainable development model throughout the European regions;

12. Repeats its call for the establishment of a regional planning observatory and supports, as a transitional and experimental solution, its introduction in the form of a research programme financed under Article 10 of the ERDF;

13. Is willing to consider the creation of a special budget heading for the funding of a European Regional Planning Observatory (ORATE) of a Community nature, consisting of a network of research institutes; considers that the main task of ORATE should be the provision of the analytical support required for the continual updating of the ESDP, under the direction of the Regional Development Committee and in cooperation with the Commission;

14. Is aware of the provisional nature of the policy options set out in the draft Perspective; nevertheless expresses its concern at the basically urban and continental nature of the concept of European regional development which the document provides and the inadequate consideration of the many regional realities of Europe (islands and archipelagos, coastal and maritime regions, rural areas, areas of low population density, areas of outstanding ecological importance, mountain areas, etc.); calls for a consistent and integrated approach to these areas;

15. Considers that the key function of the transport policy is not sufficiently reflected in the present draft Perspective; takes the view that a transport policy directed towards improving the accessibility of the peripheral regions and aimed at greater sustainability could help to counteract the growing process of congestion facing the territory of the European Union;

16. Points out that equal access to communications infrastructure and the harmonious growth of employment and business in the EU¨s various regions are the ESDP¨s top priorities; emphasizes that one of the main objectives to be pursued must be the creation of trans-European networks designed to alleviate the peripheral and/or insular nature of certain regions, the ultimate aim being the implementation of a genuine overall policy to correct regional imbalances;

17. Draws attention to the need to pursue policies for developing and reviving European ports, essentially those situated in the EU¨s outlying and outermost regions;

18. Underlines the need to promote an overall shipping policy designed to facilitate intra- and extra-European communications by promoting maritime transport, a mode of transport that respects the environment and helps to ease congestion in transport on land, but one which is at present underdeveloped, especially in the outlying and outermost regions;

19. Takes the view that the application of the ESDP could contribute to the implementation of Nature 2000, in particular the Habitat Directive and the Birds Directive;

20. Underlines the urgent need to incorporate in the draft ESDP a chapter on the regional perspectives of enlargement, which must also take account of the impact of enlargement on the fifteen present Member States; takes note of the document submitted by the Commission for this purpose at the Glasgow informal Council;

21. Considers that the ESDP should give greater attention to regional planning in the field of transnational, cross-border and interregional cooperation; reaffirms the need to develop a legal framework that will facilitate cooperation, on the lines of the Council of Europe¨s Framework Convention on Transfrontier Cooperation by Local or Regional Authorities;

22. Welcomes the Commission proposal to maintain Interreg, with particular regard to cross-border cooperation; considers that its financial allocation should be consolidated and that it is therefore necessary to go beyond the present predominantly bilateral form of cooperation and promote the creation of joint management bodies for the programmes in which greater participation by the regional and local authorities can be ensured;

23. Is in favour of strengthening the pilot projects financed under Article 10 of the ERDF in the field of regional planning and interregional and urban cooperation, maintaining their decentralized nature;

24. Calls on the Commission to report regularly on all aspects of European spatial development policy;

25. Considers that there is a need to strengthen cooperation with the Council of Europe;

26. Wishes to be actively involved in the organization of the forum on regional planning to be held in Brussels in 1999;

27. Reserves the option for Parliament to state its views on the definitive ESDP document when the time comes, and calls for its adoption by the Council;

28. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, Commission, the parliaments of the Member States, the Committee of the Regions and the Economic and Social Committee.