Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy and EU Budget
ES makroreģionālo stratēģiju īstenošana
Opinion factsheet
Šajā lapā
- Kohēzijas politika
- Pārrobežu un teritoriālā sadarbība
Opinion number:
CDR-2554-2017
Status:
Pieņemtie
Objective
Macro-Regional Strategies are producing their first results, but have not shown their full potential yet. The opinion reacts to the Report from the Commission on the implementation of EU macro-regional strategies (MRS) and identifies specific issues with their implementation. In addition to providing the local and regional perspective on MRS this CoR opinion has a wider strategic aim in the context of ongoing preparations for the next programming period.
Impact
This CoR opinion was adopted on 30 November 2017, at the 126th plenary session, before te European Parliament starts its discussions on the report from the European Commission on the implementation of EU macro-regional strategies. The EP rapporteur, MEP Cozzolino participated in the 126th CoR Plenary Session and underlined during his speech, that the permanent dialog and coordinated efforts between members of the European Parliament and the local and regional elected authorities is a great opportunity to achieve more, not only in the topic of MRS but also in many other policies.
Essential points
THE EUROPEAN COMMITTEE OF THE REGIONS
- welcomes the European Commission's first ever single report on the implementation of EU MRS and notes that the EU needs a territorial vision which goes beyond borders to develop a "global approach";
- underlines the potential role of MRS for integrated development beyond the borders of the EU and particularly in view of the UK leaving the EU; therefore suggests to explore how MRS could contribute to build the future relationship between the United Kingdom and the EU and demands a strong involvement of local and regional authorities in the future discussion on this matter on both sides;
- regrets that the added value of MRS is currently not sufficiently reflected in sectoral policies and their financing programmes. This leads to a practical difficulty when projects need to comply with the strategic requirements of the MRS and sectoral policies, which provide the funding and might be significantly different. As a result, projects falling under MRS need longer to prepare and thus are less competitive than "standard" sectoral policy projects;
- argues that the Three No's should be replaced by Three Yes's, to improve the use of existing legislation, institutions and funding. A practical approach should be adopted whereby the necessary measures are taken to improve the functioning of MRS rather than focusing on confusing principles such as the Three No's. The CoR says yes to better synergies with funding instruments, yes to better embedding of existing structures in MRS and yes to better implementation of existing rules.