7.7.2007   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 156/1

—

Europe is currently experiencing huge socio-economic changes and technological challenges that are central to the main objective of the 2000 Lisbon Agenda, maintaining and developing a European model able to combine prosperity and solidarity. Europe can do this only by keeping a robust policy framework which provides actors with instruments not only to seize new opportunities but also to deal with the repercussions. The regions and local communities are among the most exposed to these challenges but are also the best-positioned to translate strategic policy orientations into concrete actions, capable of mobilising social and economic actors across Europe.

—

The renewed EU strategy for growth and jobs can, therefore, succeed only if it is able to mobilise its resources in all of the Union's territories. Both EU and national budgets are under pressure, however, and Europe must, therefore, attempt to find the best way of increasing the financial resources available. The CoR considers that, because of its strategic orientation and delivery mechanisms, cohesion policy is an effective lever at the Union's disposal.

—

The CoR considers that the leverage effect of EU cohesion policy can be significantly reinforced in the 2007-2013 programming period. The tried and tested principles underpinning cohesion policy have been complemented by a number of measures: the adoption of a more strategic approach for cohesion policy, earmarking and a greater concentration of funds in priority sectors, an improved legal framework for adopting innovative financing schemes, the attachment of due importance to urban development programmes and upgrading territorial cooperation.

1.1

On 24 March 2006, in a letter signed by Commissioner Wallström, the European Commission stated that it would be interested in the Committee of the Regions drawing up an outlook opinion on The leverage effect of European Cohesion Policy under the Structural Funds . The Commission is of the view that the Committee's opinion will make a substantial contribution to the Fourth Report on Cohesion, which is due to be adopted in Spring 2007.

1.2

The Committee of the Regions also received a letter, dated 20 July, from the President of the European Parliament, Mr Josep Borrell, asking the CoR to deliver an opinion on the report by the MEP Ms Francisca Pleguezuelos Aguilar (ES/PES), a member of Parliament's REGI Committee, on the repercussions of structural policy for cohesion in the EU. The COTER Commission decided that this outlook opinion would also meet the request from Parliament.

1.3

This opinion attempts to contribute to the debate on the future of cohesion policy in an enlarged Europe and its role in the Union's budget. In the Committee's view, a number of past proposals have questioned the effectiveness of cohesion policy in a European Union in need of reform as a result of enlargement and which is deeply involved in the process of globalisation. This report is primarily concerned with the underestimate of the effects of cohesion policy implied in these earlier proposals.

1.4

Europe is currently experiencing huge socio-economic changes and technological challenges that are central to the main objective of the 2000 Lisbon Agenda, maintaining and developing a European model able to combine prosperity and solidarity. Europe can do this only by keeping a robust policy framework which provides actors with instruments not only to seize new opportunities but also to deal with the repercussions.

1.5

The regions and local communities are among the most exposed to these challenges but are also the best-positioned to translate strategic policy orientations into concrete actions, capable of mobilising social and economic actors across Europe.

1.6

The renewed EU strategy for growth and jobs can, therefore, succeed only if it is able to mobilise its resources in all of the Union's territories. Both EU and national budgets are under pressure, however, and Europe must, therefore, attempt to find the best way of increasing the financial resources available. The CoR considers that, because of its strategic orientation and delivery mechanisms, cohesion policy is an effective lever at the Union's disposal.

1.7

This opinion will attempt to bring a range of elements to the debate, giving broad consideration to the leverage effect, taking account of a number of impacts that cohesion policy has throughout the Union. The methodological appendix contains the information necessary to understand the scientific methodology and the working dynamics used by the Committee in drawing up this opinion (3).

—

Financial aspects

—

Political and strategic aspects of thematic concentration

—

Institutional capacity building

—

Increasing cohesion in Europe.

2.1.1

Cohesion policy offers considerable added value at European level, since Community expenditure helps to achieve better results and to secure the support of stakeholders more effectively than expenditure at the national or regional levels. According to European Commission's estimates (4), every euro spent at EU level by cohesion policy leads to further expenditure in Objective 1 regions, averaging 0,9 euros. If we consider Objective 2 regions, the average additional expenditure generated rises to 3 euros for every euro invested.

2.1.2

This multiplier effect is a result firstly of the thematic and geographical concentration of the Structural Funds. The concentration of the Funds, in conjunction with a reasonable set of instruments, increases the chances of achieving the necessary critical mass, thus making it possible to generate further investment at a later date. The capacity for attracting investment can thus be increased through thematic and geographical concentration, because this means that investment can be made with lower costs.

2.1.3

Secondly, a leverage effect is also created as a result of the wide variety of financing instruments available, even though Member States and regions are often unable to make the best use of all the measures potentially available under cohesion policy. The study referred to in this opinion identified the global grant, for example, as a flexible instrument that can create and enhance the financial leverage effect of many projects and programmes.

2.1.4

Other instruments that could be used to promote the leverage effect are those derived from the Structural Funds' involvement in financial engineering instruments for businesses, especially SMEs, such as risk-capital funds, guarantee funds, loan funds and urban development funds, for example. In many eligible regions considerable experience has been built up of these support instruments, particularly in the area of risk capital finance, in the course of implementing the Structural Funds. The same is true of the development of revolving funds, which can make a contribution to regional development beyond the funding period. Welcome in this context are the JEREMIE, JASPERS and JESSICA initiatives, promoted by the European Investment Bank (EIB) and the European Investment Fund (EIF), among others, which could play a significant role in implementing this type of measure.

2.1.5

This type of instrument can also increase public authorities' capacity for cooperating with the international financial institutions and with the private banking sector, which can act as sources of financing for other development projects. Other potential advantages of using these instruments are the greater flexibility that they can bring to management of the Structural Funds and greater solvency when dealing with the external agents provided by the EIB and the EIF.

2.1.6

Lastly, the leverage effect can be increased by improving a range of factors concerned with strengthening public-private partnerships. Being able to identify obstacles that put off private investors and setting up and supporting project teams and partnerships with the private sector are crucial factors for generating private investment in relatively short timeframes.

2.1.7

Because of its stable financing and multiannual programming, cohesion policy also ensures the possibility of developing solid relationships with the private sector, which has the potential to generate greater investment over a longer period of time. This defining feature of cohesion policy in relation to national policies of the same type is certainly a new and additional source of added value that should not be ignored.

2.1.8

This point should be set in context; in some Member States, especially the ten new Member States, a sharp increase in public investment might jeopardise their meeting the deficit criterion and the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact in the short and medium term. Greater use of public-private partnerships (PPP) might be a valid alternative solution to a direct increase in public investment.

2.2.1

Public investment must be carefully defined and properly planned at all levels. It is therefore important to emphasise that cohesion policy has a key role to play in organising regional and national priorities in such a way as to create synergy at the European level. It goes without saying that a European investment strategy must be matched by corresponding national and regional policies that should result in high-quality public investment, above all in areas relating to the Lisbon Strategy and its links to the Gothenburg strategy.

2.2.2

This investment concerns education, knowledge, innovation and research, environmental protection, social services, lifelong learning and the establishment of European bodies. This investment not only affects demand; it also has long-term structural effects on the economy, increasing economic growth and making the regions more competitive. The leverage effect created by cohesion policy is thus caused by a number of different factors.

2.2.3

First of all, by the Member States and regions incorporating new ideas and approaches into policies, in order to promote innovation in economic development. The case studies that have been analysed lead to the conclusion that cohesion policy has focused national policy priorities on areas that are important to economic growth, such as innovation, research and active policies to improve employment and social inclusion.

2.2.4

This focus has developed in particular as a result of the opportunity provided by the Funds to launch pilot projects, with new approaches and instruments, such as cluster policies for innovation or more participatory approaches. This has helped to raise awareness and to broaden the scope of the ‘innovation’ concept, more successfully incorporating aspects relating to organisation, finances, management, training and promoting innovation into regional development strategies.

2.2.5

Secondly, cohesion policy has led to account being taken of political areas that were previously overlooked by national or regional policies. A number of pilot-projects such as the Regional Innovation Strategies (RIS) and the ERDF's Innovative Actions have gradually established themselves as key national and regional policies. Broadly speaking, the most flexible and market-focused approaches have been the common denominator for the new approaches introduced by cohesion policy.

2.2.6

Lastly, the joint national and regional development strategies that make up cohesion policy have promoted the adoption of more strategic approaches to economic development and employment, which has in turn helped to implement concrete projects. A number of areas, such as technology, innovation, the development of human capital, equal opportunities and the environment were identified as important factors for growth and built into the relevant polices to achieve a more integrated approach.

2.3.1

Another aspect of leverage in the implementation of the Structural Funds worth highlighting is their effect on the way in which civil services operate, in other words, modernising them, improving their management and harmonising their procedures in the European context. Cohesion policy has supported the implementation of Community policies, especially environmental protection and equal opportunities, as well as economic and social restructuring, in line with the priorities set out in the Lisbon and Gothenburg strategies.

2.3.2

In this regard, it is worth highlighting the implementation of the National Reform Plans as key elements for achieving the aims of the Renewed Lisbon Strategy and the necessary coordination between these and the National Strategic Reference Frameworks 2007-2013.

2.3.3

Mention should also be made of promoting partnerships, improving institutional capacity for designing and implementing public policies and extending the culture of evaluation, transparency and exchanging good practice. These factors all form part of the system developed in the European Union for cohesion policy, thus helping to improve governance at all levels, because authorities then apply many of these approaches in other sectors. The creation of new bodies, such as the Regional Development Agencies, has also played a key development role in many of the Union's regions.

2.3.4

Cohesion policy has also made a substantial contribution to the drafting of plans and programmes in this area. There is an ever greater emphasis on rigorous diagnosis and analysis, objectives are drawn up with greater precision and plans and programmes are better supervised and evaluated, with benchmarking becoming standard practice. Designing long-term strategies for public investment has become a common feature of today's planning culture.

2.3.5

This has also increased Member States' capacity for adopting and effectively implementing Community legislation in a number of areas, such as the environment. In particular, cohesion policy has led to major changes in public procurement law in the Member States, opening up public markets to all EU companies and making access to them easier, thereby strengthening the single market. This aspect warrants particular consideration in the light of the recent rounds of EU enlargement.

2.3.6

Lastly, the European Union's cohesion policy has promoted and strengthened the role of the regions in the decision-making process when drawing up and implementing Community regional policies. Achieving critical mass in human terms to ensure the sound management of the Funds has helped to secure greater autonomy for local and regional authorities and a real increase in regionalisation and local autonomy in the European Union.

2.4.1

Cohesion policy has also had a leverage effect on building a more cohesive Europe, as the result of a number of different factors.

2.4.2

Firstly, the principle of partnership and the active role played by leaders has encouraged cooperation between public institutions and the different sectors of society which has played a key role in finding solutions to problems.

2.4.3

Secondly, cohesion policy has helped to find multi-dimensional solutions to highly complex and diverse problems. The problems affecting the EU's different regions are undoubtedly varied and the conditions and economic situations diverse. Nevertheless, cohesion policy has led to account being taken of this diversity, especially in the Union's peripheral regions, in those lagging furthest behind and in its outermost regions. This cohesive approach has also had a marked effect on other Member State policies.

2.4.4

Cohesion policy has thus helped to create the appropriate conditions for cooperation between EU regions and local authorities, mainly through the Interreg initiative, which has helped to settle longstanding disputes or past rifts across the two sides of a border. Moreover, cooperation between municipalities and regions without a common border has developed strongly as a result of the promotion of interregional cooperation and today it makes a not insignificant contribution to the development of new regional strategies.

2.4.5

In previous Structural Fund periods, the close link between the EFRD and the EAGGF brought about considerable leverage effects in relation to integrated rural development. With a view to achieving the objective of territorial cohesion, the link between the EFRD and EAFRD must be continued at least at the level of coordination and cooperation.

2.4.6

The effects of the Urban programmes have been particularly significant in this regard: they have had a real impact in terms of both physical regeneration and social inclusion, and they have both effectively demonstrated the added value of European policy to citizens and boosted effectiveness by concentrating actions.

2.4.7

Lastly, cohesion policy has had a crucial multiplier effect on the profile of European integration. This effect has been all the greater because cohesion policy has helped to improve public services and the quality of life.

3.1

As a result of its specific features (partnership, additionality, strategic programming and multiannual funding), EU cohesion policy has had a number of significant impacts and leverage effects.

3.2

EU cohesion policy is a lever for financial pooling and public private partnership. It acts as a catalyst for national public and private funding in different sectors, due to its funding stability over a multiannual programming period and its capacity to mobilise a critical funding mass.

3.3

This leverage effect and other cohesion policy impacts occur in all types of region and in a great variety of programmes and projects, irrespective of the project's cost.

3.4

It should also be pointed out that the Funds' management must be simplified, in order to maximise partnerships' leverage effect. Furthermore, keeping eligible areas small and fragmented can hamper partnership cooperation in some regions, which has a major impact on the selection and commitment of partners. This problem will however be resolved in the 2007-2013 period, in which the new regulations have set out to abandon the present Objective 2 zoning.

3.5

EU cohesion policy is a lever for strategic policy orientation. It has the capacity and the potential to generate innovative approaches in different fields and to guide a large number of policies at national, regional and local level. Cohesion policy is a driving force, effectively linking the process of setting ambitious common EU objectives, such as the Lisbon strategy, with their successful acceptance and delivery by key players across the EU.

3.6

EU cohesion policy also acts as an instrument to lever resources to give decisive support to measures directly related to the Lisbon agenda, based on R&D and innovation, which are critical factors for growth in the medium and long term.

3.7

A critical factor in the success of the innovative programmes and projects kick-started by cohesion policy is that ‘new concepts and approaches’ are accepted at the highest political and administrative levels. The coherence of strategies and collaboration between administrations are equally important. These factors have stimulated the leverage effect of the Structural Funds.

3.8

EU cohesion policy has significant effects on institutional capacity building. Applying the partnership principle, it has promoted a new model of collaborative governance throughout the EU, strategically involving the different levels of government and civil society, thus ensuring greater social and economic capital in the regions and local authorities. This will be a critical factor for development in the new Member States.

3.9

In order to maximise the long-term leverage effect of the Structural Funds, account must be taken of a region's general context and its cultural identity. There must therefore also always be a balanced relationship between EU-wide requirements and regional priorities. Attempting to change the culture and mindset of a given society, by promoting innovation, education, the entrepreneurial spirit and creativity, guarantees that the changes potentially generated by the Structural Funds will be lasting.

3.10

EU cohesion policy is a lever for the cohesive building of Europe. It has the potential to integrate various types of territory across Europe, allows for the active participation of economic and social stakeholders and is visible and perceived to be inclusive by European citizens because of its tangible contribution to improving the quality of life.

3.11

Cohesion policy also provides leverage for sustainable growth that respects the environment, preventing its neglect from becoming a factor that limits growth, as well as the quality of life and conservation of natural resources.

3.12

Because it covers the entire EU, cohesion policy provides a suitable continent-wide framework for ensuring balanced economic and social development. Addressing both convergence and competitiveness factors, it creates the essential conditions for pooling experience and exchanging best practice. Furthermore, it ensures a complete and integrated framework that consolidates mutual learning, and ensures financing and the replication of successful initiatives through practical implementation methods.

3.13

The CoR considers that the leverage effect of EU cohesion policy can be significantly reinforced in the 2007-2013 programming period. The tried and tested principles underpinning cohesion policy have been complemented by a number of measures: the adoption of a more strategic approach for cohesion policy, earmarking and a greater concentration of funds in priority sectors, an improved legal framework for adopting innovative financing schemes, the attachment of due importance to urban development programmes and upgrading territorial cooperation. These changes have confirmed that, when fundamental EU policy shifts occur, cohesion policy can play a central role in giving practical inspiration and support to economic and social change throughout the EU.

3.14

The development and selection of projects has been identified as a key factor for success: the type of instrument must be chosen carefully to ensure the best match for the regional context and the objectives to be achieved.

4.1

Recommends that the European Commission incorporate the concept of leverage into its forthcoming evaluation of the current state and progress of cohesion policy.

4.2

Suggests that the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council consider the leverage effect as an appropriate framework for evaluating EU policies, in particular as regards the mid-term review of the Community budget.

4.3

Recommends that the European Commission step up its efforts to raise awareness of cohesion policy and its benefits, profile and image in all Member States and in particular in local and regional authorities.

4.4

Recommends that the European Commission build on the work already undertaken to promote different financial instruments under the Structural Funds (JEREMIE, JESSICA, etc.) and in particular create the necessary competition law arrangements for the development of risk capital funds and guarantee programmes in the regions.

4.5

Recommends that the European Commission and the Member States cut red tape, establish a legal, administrative and financial framework that facilitates innovative activity and stimulate specific forms of funding for innovative companies (including risk-capital, business angels, micro-credit, etc.).

4.6

Recommends that the European Commission and the Member States evaluate progress on simplification and decentralisation of the management of the Structural Funds for the period 2007-2013. In particular, it is recommended that particular attention be paid to ensuring proportionality between administrative costs and the type and scale of the measure and to the consequences of the administrative costs for local and regional authorities.

4.7

Recommends that the Member States strengthen partnerships at all stages of the governance and management of the Structural Funds, putting into practice effective ways of involving regional and local authorities and civil society throughout the process, and recommends a thorough-going partnership with cities on account of their potential as drivers of growth and employment.

4.8

Recommends that the European Commission, Parliament, the Member States and the EIB clearly identify the obstacles that are keeping investors away from engaging with PPPs co-funded by the Structural Funds. Clear interpretation at EU level of PPP agreements and simplification of state aids regulation would thus be of considerable help. Disseminating knowledge about the potential benefits and problems of PPP among regional and local authorities is also needed.

4.9

Recommends that the European Commission and the Member States safeguard the experimental and pioneering role often played by the Structural Funds. In this respect strongly recommends that the Member States use the performance reserves and other instruments to reward and expand the most successful strategies and to consolidate the results of territorial cooperation.

4.10

Calls on the European Commission to respect the close link between Structural Fund measures and the rural development programmes, and to facilitate and promote optimum alignment and coordination of content at every level — notwithstanding the need for clearly separated accounts.

4.11

Recommends that particular attention be paid when implementing the Structural Funds to the goals set out in the Kyoto Protocol and that everyone concerned stays on track towards sustainable growth in a way that respects the environment.

4.12

Recommends that the Member States and the Commission promote the leverage effect when programming the Structural Funds so as to encourage the generation, stimulation and funding of projects with a considerable leverage effect, and when drawing up reports and in the evaluation cycle.

4.13

Notes the need also to consider particular regional features at all levels in relation to future cohesion policy, given that ‘strength in diversity’ is a key to the success of the leverage effect of cohesion policy.

4.14

Recommends that, in order to take full advantage of the leverage effect of the Structural Funds, the regions and Member States be rigorous in establishing adequate coherence between regional strategies, National Reform Plans, National Strategic Reference Frameworks and Operational Programmes implemented under European cohesion policy.

4.15

Suggests addressing the benefits of the leverage effect and working on improving public awareness of the potential benefits through both specialised and large-scale publicity activities and on disseminating good practice, as the Committee of the Regions does through its Open Days.

4.16

Recommends that the Commission study and measure long-term development in the regions, focusing on the fact that changes in their culture and mindset, along with public communication that is transparent in every respect and is easy for all stakeholders to understand, are needed to ensure that these regions make real progress on their social and economic development.

4.17

Welcomes the initiative of the European Commission to establish ‘Regions for Economic Change’ networks and recommends a broad thematic range in order to reflect different territorial dynamics of change, making use of innovations produced during the current period and which should actively involve local and regional authorities in the process of selecting the initiative's priority fields and expects to be fully involved in the development of this initiative.

4.18

Recommends that the European Institutions adopt the approach of solidarity between territories as a fundamental dimension of the concept of EU cohesion. Cohesion policy must continue to be a central element of European integration policy.

7.7.2007   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 156/8

—

judges it essential, especially given the current debate on the future of Europe, to step up participation by, and information for, young people in the communities where they live;

—

stresses the need for youth issues to be addressed across the board by all councils, as young people should be taken into account in all the EU's area of interest;

—

recalls that young people represent a key factor for achieving the objectives of the new Lisbon strategy, and considers it essential that they be provided with better education, training, mobility, entry into employment;

—

does not, however, underestimate the major challenges facing young people today, such as unemployment, late entry into the world of work, the insecure nature of work, difficulties in obtaining housing and consequent difficulties in choosing one's path in life;

—

advocates projects that encourage young people to take part in local and regional government and in the management of their respective communities, as well as links between local authorities and schools with a view to fostering a civic awareness and informed use of the right to vote;

—

calls upon the Commission to support initiatives to disseminate European youth policies and the provisions of the European Youth Pact at local level, using local authorities' networks and giving young administrators an active role.

1.1

welcomes the new Communication from the Commission, which assesses the follow-up given by the Member States to the common objectives regarding participation by and information for young people;

1.2

considers that since the publication of the White Paper in 2001, the Member States have made progress towards a greater focus on young people, but that much more remains to be done, either through the Open Method of Coordination (OMC) in the youth field, or through further action under related policies;

1.3

takes note of the recent Resolution of the Council and of the Representatives of the Governments of the Member States meeting within the Council, which has identified new measures designed to strengthen the application and implementation of the common objectives for participation by and information for young people;

1.4

agrees with the Council that the four priority themes proposed by the White Paper (participation, information, voluntary activities and greater knowledge and understanding of youth) and the relevant common objectives remain highly topical, and believes that they should guide the work of the Member States and the European institutions in this particular sector, and in all other policies concerning young people;

1.5

stresses the need for youth issues to be addressed across the board by all Councils, as young people should be taken into account in all the EU's areas of interest;

1.6

points out however that the Council could have given greater weight to the importance of local and regional authorities, especially in the sections outlining measures designed to further the implementation of the common objectives, seeing that local and regional authorities perform a crucial role in education and in fostering civic awareness among young people;

1.7

judges it essential, especially given the current debate on the future of Europe, to step up participation by, and information for, young people in the communities where they live, in order to increase their feeling of belonging to the Union, to ensure that they can exercise those rights set out in the European Union's charter of fundamental rights, and to help give new impetus to the European venture by making the concept of European citizenship a reality, emphasises that particular attention should be given in these respects to participation by, and information for, young people living in island regions;

1.8

does not, however, underestimate the major challenges facing young people today, such as unemployment, late entry into the world of work, the insecure nature of work, difficulties in obtaining housing and consequent difficulties in choosing one's path in life, the lack of appropriate means of acquiring the right skills, poverty, premature school leaving and social exclusion;

1.9

believes therefore that the objectives of participation and information for young people can be achieved more effectively if the Member States and institutions make every effort to offer them better prospects in life, guaranteeing full enjoyment of the fundamental rights set out in the European Union's charter of fundamental rights (which include the right to work, the right to marry and found a family, and the right to reconcile family and professional life);

1.10

recalls, in this regard, that young people represent a key factor for achieving the objectives of the new Lisbon strategy, and considers it essential that they be provided with better education, training, mobility, entry into employment, social inclusion and services for young families:

1.11

considers therefore that local and regional authorities' youth policies can take on a European dimension by means of appropriate national policies and funds, together with specific Community programmes that increase information and participation opportunities for young European citizens in local, regional, national and European civic and political life;

1.12

recalls that the Union is founded on the principles of freedom and democracy and believes that for that reason more practical steps must be taken without delay to ensure that all European citizens, starting with the very youngest, are able to participate in it, with due respect for the principle of subsidiarity.

2.1

notes that the Council views the aim of ‘participation by young people in the life of the community’ principally as promoting their involvement in participatory structures;

2.2

recalls that it is possible to take part in the life of the local community without belonging to an organised structure; believes therefore that this objective should be interpreted in a broad way, encouraging initiatives which also seek the involvement of young people who spontaneously decide to take part in the life of their local community;

2.3

fully agrees that special attention should be focused on the most disadvantaged young people and considers that they should be identified more accurately in each local area; pays tribute to the initiatives taken by Poland and Lithuania geared to young people living in rural areas;

2.4

urges the Commission and the Member States to set up and make budgetary provision for measures designed to boost the involvement in European civic life of young people from the outermost regions of the EU, as their remoteness makes it particularly difficult for them to become integrated and involved;

2.5

also appreciates all those initiatives undertaken by public authorities to support participatory structures by means of financial contributions or by providing equipment, technical assistance, human resources, premises or help with setting up Internet sites.

2.6

views this objective as of fundamental importance if active citizenship is to be put into practice: allowing young people to hold more sway in local, regional and national bodies and even ministries and political parties, and ensuring that young men and women enjoy equal opportunities;

2.7

highlights the importance of harnessing new technology in order to bring the EU closer to young people. It is therefore essential for the European institutions to encourage the various innovative measures that the European social players and, in particular, local and regional authorities could offer; in this context, considers that exchanges of best practices would be particularly beneficial and, specifically, proposes that the Commission promote the organisation of an Annual Youth Forum where young people and public institutions could exchange ideas and encourage new initiatives;

2.8

welcomes all Member State initiatives to sustain dialogue with young people: local, national and regional councils, youth parliaments, specific youth commissions, ombudsmen or correspondents, and inter-ministerial meetings; and hopes that these will be further developed;

2.9

reports that in Italy, a consultative body for young administrators has been set up within the framework of the National Association of Italian Local Authorities, one of whose many tasks is to monitor, encourage and enhance the involvement of young people in local administrations;

2.10

trusts that both the Member States and local and regional authorities will mainstream programmes for learning to participate democratically in institutions into the official education system and that they will encourage interactive links between formal and non-formal education;

2.11

points out that links between schools and local authorities can be an effective means of encouraging student participation in the life of their own communities, and calls on local administrators — especially young administrators — to serve as ambassadors, organising public debates on matters of local interests which would also be open to young people who have left school;

2.12

is convinced that opening up local government to young people entails as an objective a real understanding of responsibility in managing one's own area, helps to generate civic awareness, and helps to foster informed exercise of the right to vote, which to date has been of little interest to all too many young people;

2.13

hails the Finnish initiative in extending voting rights for local elections to young people over the age of 16, and the German initiative on youth projects for urban regeneration, and welcomes the Council's call to envisage a debate on lowering the voting age;

2.14

expresses its appreciation of the city of Stockholm's case of a young woman as deputy mayor;

2.15

holds the Council of Europe's Revised European Charter on the Participation of Young People in Local and Regional Life to be a highly valuable instrument, and hopes that it will be disseminated among the local and regional authorities of the Union, together with closer cooperation in this sphere between the Committee of the Regions and the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities.

2.16

agrees with the Commission's proposals, confirmed by the Council, on how to reach this objective;

2.17

is pleased to note that the European Commission has taken into consideration the CoR's previous comments (1) concerning a sustained policy of debate and consultation with young people and strongly supports the idea of improved dialogue on the European Agenda. However, reiterates that this must involve in particular local and regional authorities;

2.18

welcomes the new ‘Youth in Action’ programme and the other youth education and training programmes, which have allowed many young people to gain practical experience of Europe, and urges ever broader access and wider dissemination of them, with a special focus on the most disadvantaged young people, encourages the Commission and Member States to further decentralise the management of this programme, in order to ensure subsidiarity in its management by regional authorities, and regrets the discontinuation of the Young Entrepreneurs programme, which supported many young people in starting up businesses and gaining important experiences;

2.19

proposes that European local and regional authorities provide a forum for young people from their respective communities who work in the institutions, in European offices or are involved in European programmes, and that they recruit them as ambassadors in debates on Europe, thereby strengthening the dual participation approach and giving value to work and to educational and vocational experience abroad;

2.20

calls upon the Commission to support initiatives to disseminate European youth policies and the provisions of the European Youth Pact at local level, using local authorities' networks and giving young administrators an active role.

3.1

recalls that the right to information lies at the heart of the youth information work undertaken by the European Union; considers it in consequence the duty of the Member States and, where appropriate, local and regional authorities, to implement policies as part of the educational process ensuring effective exercise of this right by young people, putting special focus on promoting clarity and ease of access to information;

3.2

strongly welcomes the fact that the European Commission took on board the CoR's comments on the importance of local and regional dimension in youth policy, recognising that the mobilisation of local authorities is crucial for fostering the local participation of young people. Reiterates in this respect the importance of the local and regional dimension since it is at this level that the first direct contact with politics is made and that active citizenship becomes a reality;

3.3

notes with satisfaction that Internet sites providing information for young people have been set up in almost all the Member States, but urges that an effective information strategy covering questions and subjects of interest to young people be set up in various fields;

3.4

agrees with the Council that the European youth portal is a highly useful tool that should be developed and disseminated, and that locally-provided instruments and those at national and European level must be better coordinated, in order to circulate information more rapidly and easily;

3.5

believes that networks of young people's associations operating at local level should be involved in the process of consulting and involving young people, to avoid the danger of only major national networks participating, and calls for the development of channels for the involvement and consultation of young people who do not belong to associations. To this end, direct involvement of municipalities which can develop their own models for young people to take part in the consultation and cooperation processes will be welcomed.

3.6

is informed by the Commission that only a few Member States focus on training for those working in the sphere of information for young people; calls for more attention in this regard, with specific study programmes;

3.7

considers that the Commission should place greater emphasis on the connection between information and counselling, with a view to helping young people to developing skills in obtaining, selecting and assessing information, in order to become informed users. The Member States are urged to use all existing channels to disseminate information to young people (Internet, mobile phones, video, cinema).

3.8

is pleased to note the new focus given to local youth councils, with systematic involvement of young people in local decision-making bodies, involving the support of regional and local authorities. Calls on the Commission to encourage the drafting of precise criteria regarding the objective of participation of young people in order to support local participation and active citizenship;

3.9

highlights the importance of involving young people in fine-tuning information strategies, devising information products, disseminating information and in counselling activities;

3.10

considers that the contributions of individual young people or youth organisations in this regard represent a valuable resource that should be harnessed as effectively as possible, and calls on the Commission to urge the Member States to identify new forms of participation.

4.1

is well aware that the youth sector is an area for which the Member States are responsible, and therefore calls for joint commitment on the part of the Commission and the Member States, in collaboration with local and regional authorities;

4.2

considers moreover that the Commission could highlight the achievements, and more specifically the best practices of the Member States.

5.1

recommends that the Member States guarantee equal opportunities between all citizens but especially between juveniles and young men and women;

5.2

trusts that resources will be allocated fairly between projects for youth associations and those targeting individual young people, while not overlooking programmes for the most disadvantaged groups;

5.3

also hopes that the Member States will encourage young people to become involved in local, regional and national bodies, ministries and political parties, and that they will consult them through youth councils and other participatory structures;

5.4

advocates projects on the part of the Member States that encourage young people to take part in local and regional government and in the management of their respective communities, as well as links between local authorities and schools with a view to fostering a civic awareness and informed use of the right to vote;

5.5

calls upon local, regional and national authorities to bring young people into the debates on the future of Europe, in order to boost their participation in the development of the European Union, giving an active role to those who work in the institutions or European offices or are involved in European programmes.

5.6

deems it essential that the Member States uphold the right to information by means of specific strategies, reflecting young people's needs and with a special focus on the most vulnerable groups, at the same time providing proper training courses for all those involved in educating and bringing up young people;

5.7

restates that the creation of a citizens' Europe and the integration into society of young people is one of the Committee's main political priorities, and wishes to make a contribution by undertaking to organise structured and systematic dialogues, meetings with representatives of local and regional youth associations and councils, and envisages setting up a working group to monitor and promote the real commitments of local and regional authorities, checking on local and regional best practice with the support of the relevant national associations; will aim to be instrumental to assist Member States in implementing the recommendations concerning youth participation and information;

5.8

undertakes to disseminate information on European issues more widely to feed debates at local and regional level, and on European events organised for young people, in order to step up the participation of the broadest possible;

5.9

to encourage participation in the European Union's development, calls upon the Commission to provide for an ad hoc information campaign to disseminate all European youth programmes.

5.10

appreciates the Council's stated intention of adapting and improving the lines of action and to take on board the measures outlined in the recent Resolution, and therefore asks that the comments and proposals made in the present opinion be taken into account;

5.11

urges the Member States, as part of existing routine reporting, to continue providing the Commission with information on their own youth policies, thus supporting the OMC and enabling best practice to be more accurately identified and disseminated;

5.12

agrees that the lines of action on which the Member States intend to concentrate with regard to participation and information, in order to identify the relevant action plans and in particular to disseminate best practices more widely, should be established by March 2007 at the latest;

5.13

asks the Commission to identify the best means of ensuring effective analysis of the progress made by the Member States by means of efficient statistical methods and qualitative research;

5.14

advocates setting up a working group responsible for defining instruments to assess the implementation of measures to strengthen the common objectives, and calls for representatives of local and regional authorities to be involved through the Committee;

5.15

reaffirms that the common objectives regarding youth will best be attained by providing young people with better living conditions. Hopes that, under the European Youth Pact, the Commission will devise an action plan which can better guide and uphold individual Member State initiatives, providing funding to this end, possibly tied to innovative actions and exchanges of best practice;

5.16

calls on Member States to allocate appropriate funding to local and regional authorities to carry out the implementation of the common objectives;

5.17

hopes ultimately that in order to better achieve the objectives of youth, that the issue of unstable employment among young people should be tackled by the Member States and also in the context of the discussion on the Commission's new Green Paper on labour law.

7.7.2007   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 156/14

—

believes that the Single Market is in need of fresh impetus in order to meet its challenges over the coming years. The Single Market now consists of 27 Member States, making it far more diverse than when it was first conceived. Furthermore, the Single Market now operates within a global environment. It must therefore adjust from being an internal EU project to becoming an effective instrument for improving the EU's capacity to compete effectively with the rest of the world, to achieve territorial, economic and social cohesion and to meet the targets set out in the Lisbon Agenda. Local and regional authorities have a key role in achieving this.

—

invites the European Commission and the Member States, in close cooperation with local and regional authorities, to undertake studies to determine the obstacles that regions, cities and localities currently face in the application of the Single Market and the potential solutions to creating a Single Market fit for the 21st Century.

—

recommends to the European Commission that it should focus activity on the further implementation of the Single Market in the services, labour and financial sectors. The free movement of goods has been relatively successful whereas the Single Market has been less effective in the services, labour and financial sectors.

1.

Concurs with the European Commission and the European Council that the European economy faces important new challenges and opportunities in the 21st Century. The Committee of the Regions therefore welcomes the European Commission's commitment to undertake a comprehensive review of both the Single Market and European society during 2007. The Committee of the Regions also welcomes the request from the European Commission to contribute to these reviews in the form of this ‘Outlook Opinion’;

2.

Believes that the Single Market is in need of fresh impetus in order to meet its challenges over the coming years. The Single Market now consists of 27 Member States, making it far more diverse than when it was first conceived. Furthermore, the Single Market now operates within a global environment. Informed by this Opinion, the Single Market must therefore adjust from being an internal EU project to becoming an effective instrument for improving the EU's capacity to compete effectively with the rest of the world, to achieve territorial, economic and social cohesion and to meet the targets set out in the Lisbon Agenda. Local and regional authorities have a key role in achieving this;

3.

Recognises that the free movement of goods, persons, services and capital is a fundamental principle of the European Union and provides the basis for the Single Market. It should also be remembered that the project of European integration was, and is, not only about the Single Market but driven by the aim to preserve peace through building solidarity and cohesion between the people of Europe;

4.

Stresses the importance of involving all stakeholders upstream of the decision-making process, by developing the public consultation procedures, and of giving particular attention, by way of impact assessments, to the territorial, social and environmental effects of EU legislation;

5.

Recommends that the European Commission and the Member States better harness the creative and innovative potential of local and regional authorities in Europe through addressing the implementation deficit. This relates in particular to the need to enhance openness and address protectionist policies in some Member States that hinder Small to Medium sized Enterprises (SMEs) from investing in new markets across the EU and in the world;

6.

Invites the European Commission and the Member States, in close cooperation with local and regional authorities, to undertake studies to determine the obstacles that regions, cities and localities currently face in the application of the Single Market and the potential solutions to creating a Single Market fit for the 21st Century;

7.

Notes that the role of local and regional authorities is not confined to adapting to economic change and supporting companies in the Single Market. As organisers and providers of public services they are also players in the Single Market;

8.

Recognises that social stocktaking is closely related to the effective functioning of the Single Market. The stocktaking of European society should acknowledge that traditionally defined social problems (for example, poverty and disability) may increase as a result of an ageing population and persistent unemployment. At the same time, new social problems may emerge as a result of changing family structures and globalisation. The social stocktaking should lead to a common approach towards analysis, exchange of best practice at the European level and between the Member States;

9.

Recommends that the European Commission should more systematically benchmark, measure and consider the economic performance and policy development of national and regional economies against our overseas competitors, in particular the USA, China and India, alongside other Members States and regions of the EU;

10.

Shares the Commission's view of the need to take more account of the international environment in order to maintain a competitive and attractive Community Market. A more integrated Single Market would help meet the challenge of globalisation, exploit its opportunities, thereby reducing negative perceptions. In this context the Committee of the Regions emphasises that local and regional authorities across the EU are also part of an increasingly globalised economy, in which the world trade in goods is doubling in size every decade. In the face of competition from knowledge intensive economies, European business will need to become significantly more innovative, more skilled and creative to compete;

11.

Recommends that the Single Market is fully understood as a dynamic instrument for European social and economic growth. The Single Market must be supported to evolve and appropriately respond to the changing patterns and challenges of the global economy in order to effectively increase EU economic growth by creating the necessary political and economic conditions;

12.

Believes that a common approach to drawing up a set of minimum social standards based on a shared vision should be drawn up at EU level. Specific principles governing equal treatment with regard to working conditions should be established where the employment is located and should be based on an agreement between the social partners. Given the development of the global market, many of the challenges facing the Single Market are external in nature;

13.

Recommends to the European Commission that support for skills development should, through equality of opportunity and investing in lifelong learning, focus upon ensuring that education and training policies deliver the skills needed by people to find suitable employment and respond to business needs;

14.

Emphasises that skills development is a central challenge facing European regions and together with innovation, enterprise, competition and investment, is one of the key drivers of productivity. The Committee of the Regions highlights the importance of improving the capacity for investment in skills development of Member States and local and regional authorities so as to ensure lifelong learning in practice and the promotion of active labour market policies through a sustainable approach in accordance with the Lisbon Agenda;

15.

Recommends that the European Commission, in consultation with the Member States and local and regional authorities, provides a strategic framework and targets resources to support the development of focused regional and locally based skills strategies;

16.

Recommends to the European Commission and to the Member States that the future Single Market focus on skills and employment should be developed, where appropriate, on the basis of delivery at the local and regional level. With greater regional autonomy and accountability, skills programmes, such as those delivered through the European Social Fund programme, should ensure alignment to regional and local labour markets in order to address the specific challenges faced by regions;

17.

Proposes that the European Commission and the Member States should build upon the EU's strengths as a knowledge economy and to support the transferability of skills and employability of its citizens rather than trying to compete against those economies with a competitive advantage in low-skills and low-value added employment. Skills development and lifelong learning are essential elements of any programme to make the Single Market more effective;

18.

Recalls in this context that global competition and the orientation towards knowledge -and service- economies creates new challenges for skills development and education. Low-skilled and low-paid jobs should not create a new group of ‘working poor’. It is therefore necessary to focus social provision in particular on assisting those concerned through education and training, fair pay and working conditions for all, and provisions for increased social mobility;

19.

Endorses the view of the European Council on the importance of the EU's (1) social dimension. The Committee of the Regions, therefore, also welcomes the Council's request that the European Commission and Parliament should pay due attention to the social impact of European legislation;

20.

Underlines that the Single Market should be understood as an important component of wider EU society. Therefore, the social aspects of its Single Market policies should be better addressed and the EU should build upon the different regional identities and approaches to socio-economic development in trying to implement common European principles rather than imposing uniform or solely ‘economic’ driven policy;

21.

Recommends that the European Commission continues to guarantee social and consumer rights, while freeing up the market in services (for example through the future Services Directive);

22.

Considers it necessary, as illustrated by the debate on the Services Directive, to take account of the specific nature of public service missions, with regard to the application of the internal market rules;

23.

Recommends that the European Commission specifically considers the impact of current and future demographic changes on the future success and direction of the Single Market. There should be particular attention to the uneven impact of current and future migratory population flows. Equality of opportunity is an essential principle of modern Europe; discrimination is not an option;

24.

Recommends that the European Commission should adopt a more coherent and structured approach to better address the social dimension of the Single Market. The welfare and interests of European citizens and business must be guiding principles of EU policy and are key to securing the opportunities of the Single Market. Therefore, the competitiveness of the regions should be understood in terms of both citizens' and companies' potential;

25.

Recommends that the EU should safeguard the more vulnerable members of European society. The globalisation of world markets provides additional opportunities to reinvigorate the economies of the EU. However, while supporting further economic growth that should lead to job and wealth creation, there may be sections of the European community that are unable to benefit from this growth. As a result of demographic changes and an ageing population, traditional welfare policies should adapt to these new challenges. Consequently, while exploiting the opportunities for growth, EU policies must ensure equality of opportunity, and assist social welfare structures to meet the challenges of an evolving European Single Market. This will require welfare structures, and in particular education and training, to better target those in most need while ensuring appropriate resources and incentives and to develop innovative approaches to providing effective welfare;

26.

Recommends that the European Commission and the Member States consult and work alongside local and regional authorities to stimulate a debate and engage its citizens in the goals of prosperity, solidarity and security, and the jobs and economic growth agenda. Reference should be made to the important role that social partners and social dialogue can play at all levels to evaluate market functioning, promote sustainable policies on economic migration, combat abusive working conditions, and eliminate discrimination in both the workplace and the wider labour market;

27.

Emphasises that the benefits of the Single Market have not been effectively communicated with partners, citizens and businesses alike. Reconnecting Europe with its citizens is a prerequisite for making the Single Market a success. The Committee of the Regions therefore suggests that local and regional authorities, being the closest level of government to the citizen, should take a lead role in this process. It is recommended that the European Commission should, in partnership with the Committee of the Regions, develop a communication and policy driven process to engage and meet the expectations of its citizens and business community and involve them in the European goals of prosperity, solidarity and security, and the growth and jobs agenda. These are indispensable elements for future confidence and support in the EU;

28.

Recommends that the European Commission, the Member States and local and regional authorities should, in order to allay the concerns of citizens and businesses, especially SMEs, better communicate how to manage economic and social adjustment that results from globalisation and increased competition;

29.

Recommends to the European Commission that it should focus activity on the further implementation of the Single Market in the services, labour and financial sectors. The free movement of goods has been relatively successful whereas the Single Market has been less effective in the services, labour and financial sectors;

30.

Appeals to the Member States to support local and regional authorities in the further introduction of co-ordinated, simplified and integrated business support structures at the most appropriate geographical level. There is considerable potential for these structures to provide information for public procurement opportunities and assistance in explaining the process of awarding public service contracts. Local and regional authorities also have a significant role in supporting SMEs as significant customers of the goods and services that SMEs provide;

31.

Recommends to the European Commission, in consultation with business, to promote European competitiveness through the introduction of an effective European patent system that supports patent holders in both enforcing their intellectual property rights and reducing costs while providing better incentives for innovation;

32.

Recommends to the European Commission and the Member States to undertake genuine consultation and dialogue with local and regional authorities and the business sector to identify areas where the regulatory burden upon businesses, in particular SMEs, may be reduced;

33.

Agrees that the simplification and effective application of existing EU law, are indispensable to the integration of the Single Market, but also recalls that better regulation does not necessarily mean less regulation. Harmonisation may be necessary to respect the Community acquis, so that the EU has a clear and coherent regulatory framework;

34.

Recommends to the European Commission and the Member States to apply more comprehensive ex-ante SME impact analysis to the EU legislative process and to strengthen the role of SMEs when drawing up new legislation;

35.

Calls for the principle of mutual recognition (Court of Justice ‘Cassis de Dijon’ judgement (case 120/78 20th February 1979)) to be consolidated. Therefore urges the Commission to take the necessary steps to ensure that Member States should continue to be able to have different manufacturing standards without these being a pretext for refusing to allow a product to be marketed;

36.

Recommends to the European Commission that they recognise the proactive and important role of local and regional authorities in influencing the further appropriate development of the Single Market and social reality of Europe. Municipal and regional autonomy should therefore be strengthened. The Committee of the Regions is an important partner in demonstrating the benefits of the Single Market through our close links to the citizens of Europe while at the same time ideally placed to advocate change where it is appropriate to do so.