Magazine cor 89

EUROPEAN UNION

ISSN 1681-3235

Committee of the Regions

Special feature Decentralising power to the regions

What next for Europe?

Michel Lebrun

Catiuscia Marini

Dr A. Gary Shilling

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives representa

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1

13

6

Editorial Michel Lebrun

18

External relations EU-Turkey relations: Challenges for 2015

Special feature Decentralising power to the regions: What next for Europe?

2

15

OPEN DAYS 2014 12th European Week of Regions and Cities

26

8

Our guest Dr A. Gary Shilling

EuroPCom 2014: Imag[in]ing Europe

Interview with Charles Ricq

The Little Match Girl and Saint Nicholas

www.cor.europa.eu Regions & Cities of Europe — N° 89

Tel. +32 222822211

Director of Publication: Laurent Thieule Editor-in-Chief: Branislav Stanicek

www.cor.europa.eu

Committee of the Regions Communication, Press and Events Directorate Rue Belliard/Belliardstraat 99–101 1040 Bruxelles/Brussel BELGIQUE/BELGIË

Reactions/comments:

Regions & Cities of Europe is a magazine of the Committee of the Regions, published by the Communication, Press and Events Directorate.

The content of this magazine does not necessarily reflect the opinions of the European Union institutions.

Neither the institutions/bodies of the European Union, nor any person acting on their behalf, can be held responsible for any misuse of the information provided here.

regionsandcities@cor.europa.eu

@EU_CoR

© European Union, 2014 Printed in Belgium

www.facebook.com/committee.of.the.regions

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

EDITORIAL

Decentralising power to the regions

Michel Lebrun (BE/EPP), President of the Committee of the Regions

T

his edition of our magazine focuses on two major questions. Firstly, it is clear that the concept of the region itself is shifting from a matter purely of symbol and identity to a more political and economic perception that is part of a renewal of regional autonomy or even a struggle for independence. The second major issue concerns constitutional aspects regarding Member States’ internal institutional arrangements in some countries of the European Union but also in our neighbourhood – as we can see in Ukraine.

The Committee of the Regions tries to strike the right balance between the subsidiarity principle – which involves a certain degree of administrative autonomy supported by an efficient separation of powers and respect for grass-roots democracy – and the principle of solidarity, which also serves as a unifying element. We have set out how these principles can be put into practice in our report on Multilevel Governance and Partnership, presented in October by Luc Van den Brande, former president of the Committee of the Regions.

The Charter for Multilevel Governance in Europe promotes respect of the principle throughout all stages of policy-making at both EU and Member State level. More than 170 regional and local authorities have already signed up to it, with a growing number of policymakers expressing their backing. On 2 December 2014, we organised our conference on multilevel governance that tackled two key issues: EU cohesion policy and the role of regions and cities in communicating Europe.

The 6th cohesion report has showed the regional disparities have increased after the financial crisis. Without cohesion policy, investments in the Member States most affected by the crisis would have fallen by an additional 50%. Cohesion

funding now represents more than 60% of the total investment budget in some Member States. We should work harder to ensure that the cohesion policy funding is not simply perceived as “public spending” but is considered more as an investment to achieve growth objectives.

“I am pleased to report the success of our first dialogue event, which was with the people of Namur, Belgium, on 17 November, and was attended by André Antoine, President of the Wallonia Parliament, and Maxime Prévot, Mayor of Namur. I am convinced that a constructive and open debate is needed not just to combat widespread scepticism and centrifugal forces, but also to improve the internal cohesion of our nations and their perception of Brussels’ policies.”

We will discuss this question also at the Plenary Session in December where rapporteur Catiuscia Marini, President of the Umbria region, will present her opinion on Promoting quality of public spending. I am happy that an outstanding economist A. Gary Shilling was able to nurture our debate with his views expressed in this issue. He raises a crucial aspect of deleveraging during the current economic crisis whereby local, regional and national authorities have to adjust

their budgets, following years of leveraging and increased public deficits. Furthermore, we also see emerging a new trend of “zero debt towns” presented by the German town of Offenburg, where a cross-party agreement ensured complete deleveraging of public finances.

We will lend our strong support to a communications policy that involves direct contact with the public. We are currently drafting an opinion prepared by Christophe Rouillon, Mayor of Coulaines in France, on Reconnecting Europe with its citizens and a new Communication strategy for 2015-2019 that will improve direct dialogue with people in our regions and cities.

On that note, I am pleased to report the success of our first dialogue event, which was with the people of Namur, Belgium, on 17 November, and was attended by André Antoine, President of the Wallonia Parliament, and Maxime Prévot, Mayor of Namur. I am convinced that a constructive and open debate is needed not just to combat widespread scepticism and centrifugal forces, but also to improve the internal cohesion of our nations and their perception of Brussels’ policies.

As Professor Charles Ricq points out in the interview published in this issue, we should not fear the fragmentation of Europe, because it is the beauty of its individual regions that makes up the beauty of the European mosaic as a whole. I hope that we will continue to see and to appreciate the beauty and value of each element that constitutes Europe past and present, since the European project has always been underpinned by the ongoing dialogue and search for compromise that oils the wheels of the European democratic model, as reflected in both its political unity and in the diversity of its regions and nations.

REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

1

OUR GUEST Interview with Dr A. Gary Shilling , President of A. Gary Shilling & Co., Inc.

Deleveraging is so profound and powerful that it has offset all monetary and fiscal stimuli

D

r A. Gary Shilling is one of those economists that, at the very beginning of the financial crisis, sounded the alarm of deflation. At that moment, when the printing presses of the central banks seemed to be creating inflationary pressures, he argued that the massive deleveraging process of private, corporate, municipal and sovereign debt would create strong deflationary pressures and that deflation would prevail not only in his native United States, but in all developed countries, including those in the European Union. We asked him where the euro area stands today, what reforms should be carried out to fight deflation and support economic growth, and his views on the policy measures announced by the new Commission – in particular, Jean-Claude Juncker’s EUR 300 billion investment plan. He also shared his view on the recent referenda in Scotland and Catalonia and rising euroscepticism.

You are one of the prescient economists who, at the very beginning of the financial crisis, foresaw the danger of deflation.

Could you briefly explain what deflation is and why we are under deflationary pressure today?

Deflation in its simplest terms means you have more supply than demand. In other words, the overall supply of goods and services exceeds the demand. You can get there in one of two ways, and I first defined this in a book I wrote in 1998 called Deflation, why it’s coming, whether it’s good or bad and how it will affect your investments, business and personal affairs. Then I coined a new distinction between good and bad deflation. If you have an increase in supply, that’s good deflation, in other words it’s generally driven by productivity enhancing technologies and that was the case in the late 1800s in America when two very important new technologies reined. As a result, you had very strong GDP growth – an annual rate of 4% from 1876 to 1896 – which is unprecedented for a period that long, and yet we had deflation because supply outran demand. That was good deflation.

We also had good deflation in the 1920s. The roaring 20s were an exuberant period. Industrial production almost doubled between 1921 and

2

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

1929 and yet prices declined. Yet again you had two new technologies – mass produced automobiles, which brought with it roads, bridges and everything else that goes with cars; and the other one was electrification of homes and factories. When homes were electrified, that led to the invention of electric appliances and also radio, so it spawned new technologies. Now that is the good deflation of excess supply. The bad deflation of deficient de-

“Regardless of the immense monetary and fiscal stimuli, what have you got? In the USA, 2% GDP growth, and in the euro area much less. We’ve been on the cusp of a third recession since 2007.” mand is what was going on on a global basis in the 1930s. There was simply a collapse in incomes and they were not available to buy goods and services, so prices declined in the 1930s, starting the global depression. That was the bad deflation of deficient demand.

What do you see today: good or bad deflation?

It’s fair to say that we have some of both. We certainly have excess supply – part of that is new technologies like robotics, biotechnology, the internet and so on; the other part is the result of globalisation, which has opened up huge capacity in China and other countries. However, we also have deficient demand, since, despite all the monetary and fiscal stimuli, the economies of the world are growing very slowly. This is because of global deleveraging which is going on after a period of exuberance and leveraging up, simply adding a lot of debt.

In my most recent book from 2010, The Age of Deleveraging: Investment Strategies for a Decade of Slow Growth and Deflation, I pointed out that normally it does take a decade to work off these excesses.

That’s where we are now. Regardless of the immense monetary and fiscal stimuli, what have you got? In the USA, 2% GDP growth, and in the euro area much less. We’ve been on the cusp of a third recession since 2007. Deleveraging is so profound and powerful that it has offset all the monetary and fiscal stimuli.

D

r Shilling is President of A. Gary Shilling & Co., Inc. Before establishing his own firm in 1978, Dr Shilling was Senior Vice President and Chief Economist of White, Weld & Co., Inc. Previously, he set up the Economics Department at Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith at age 29, and served as the firm’s first chief economist.

Prior to Merrill Lynch, he was with Standard Oil Co. (N.J.) (now Exxon), where he was in charge of U.S. and Canadian economic analysis and forecasting.

Twice, a poll of financial institutions conducted by Institutional Investor magazine ranked Dr Shilling as Wall Street’s top economist. Dr Shilling was also named No. 1 Commodity Trader Advisor by Futures magazine. In 2003, MoneySense ranked him as the third best market forecaster, behind Warren Buffett. He has published numerous articles and books, mainly on inflation and deflation. In late 2010, John Wiley & Sons published The Age of Deleveraging: Investment strategies for a decade of slow growth and deflation, which spent some time atop the Amazon.com best-seller list. His firm publishes a monthly newsletter, Insight. Dr Shilling earned his master’s degree and doctorate in economics at Stanford University. He is also an avid beekeeper.

It seems that the stimuli have not been very successful in supporting demand, but stock markets and equities seem to be growing.

Yes, monetary and fiscal stimuli have pushed up asset prices, specifically stocks, but it hasn’t really convinced the stockholders, who are basically high-income people, to go and spend money. The Federal Reserve hoped that that would be the case but it didn’t work. The central banks can raise and lower interest rates, they can buy and sell securities, but it never got past the stage of raising asset prices because high income people don’t tend to adjust their spending habits depending on whether asset prices go up or down, so you never got beyond that.

All this quantitative easing has not done any good.

There were many early on who said “we’re going to have rampant inflation from all this, particularly the quantitative easing, and gold is the only answer” – well look what happened to those people. Gold got to almost USD 1 900 per ounce and is now below USD 1 200. Things went the other way for them. I think it shows you the power of this deleveraging, and all of this contributes to a deflationary climate.

Within this deflationary climate, public authorities try to support economic growth by increasing spending. Jean-Claude Juncker, the newly appointed President of the European Commission, has proposed a EUR 300 billion investment plan. Do you think such a plan would help the economy?

It depends a lot on where the spending is. If the spending is strictly on support for consumer income, it doesn’t have much follow on effect. If it goes into infrastructure it probably does. Improvements to roads, bridges, digital networks and com-

munications in general do have a lasting effect, but simply supporting consumer spending probably doesn’t. Of course, the other aspect of this, particularly in Europe, is that fiscal stimuli will then cover up the need for structural reform. It detracts attention from it. Now, this is the argument from what I call the “Teutonic North”, led by Germany, as opposed to the “Club Med” south led by France, Italy and Spain.

The argument which would be made by the Germans is that fiscal stimuli will simply detract from the need for reforms, in particular labour market

“Improvements to roads, bridges, digital networks and communications in general do have a lasting effect, but simply supporting consumer spending probably doesn’t. Of course, the other aspect of this, particularly in Europe, is that fiscal stimuli will then cover up the need for structural reform. It detracts attention from it.”

reforms. I would say that you have a situation in the euro area now where the economy is slipping into a third recession. Mario Draghi, head of the ECB, has made it very clear recently that he doesn’t see monetary policy as the sole generator of growth, and I think he is right.

You can pump money into the economy, but if banks are reluctant to lend because they have a lot

of regulatory problems, the money just piles up as excess reserves. Or in the case of the euro area, all the money that was pumped in towards the end of 2011 – a lot of that has been repaid, and of course Draghi wants to get it back to where it was in the spring and summer of 2012, which means another trillion euros out there in loans. But what Draghi has recently said is we need help on the fiscal side; we can’t do it from the monetary side alone, despite the objections of Germany and other “Teutonic North” countries.

Aren’t fiscal and monetary policies necessary not only to support the economy, but also to avoid further social instability and euroscepticism?

We are approaching that turning point where we will also see a social reaction, not only in southern Europe, in the periphery, but also at its centre.

People will take to the streets, and nobody wants it to get to that stage so there is tremendous pressure on governments to do something, to try new measures to restore growth. I don’t think there is a lot that can be done until the leveraging is over, and if history is any guide we’re six years into it and we have another four to go, and at the rate that the excess debts are being worked out it could take more than another four years, but in the meantime politicians are in a very difficult position. Eurosceptic parties have appeared to be much stronger following the European elections in May and are still growing – not only in France, Italy and Spain, but also in the UK and Germany. It doesn’t look to me like it has reached a dangerous level yet, but it’s certainly disconcerting. David Cameron has had to deal with a lot of attention going to UKIP. It may be a small group, but it’s a thorn in his side that is hard to ignore.

REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

3

OUR GUEST

Economic inequality and bigger regional disparities have given rise to movements demanding regional autonomy or secession.

What do you think of the recent referendum in Scotland and the consultation in Catalonia?

To me these kinds of developments make absolutely no sense. I think when you’re in a weak economic situation you want to see bigger and stronger countries, not smaller splitting groups. Look at the Balkans. There’s a term in English called “balkanisation” which describes the splitting of countries after the First World War and the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. What you end up with is a bunch of tiny countries that are all very vulnerable.

The USA is very lucky as a country, as it developed largely after two important events. The invention of the railroad allowed the movement of people and goods easily across the country, and Lincoln’s decision to hold the country together after the civil war, regardless of the tremendous cost, laid the foundation for our unity. That was the most traumatic event in American history, but as a result we have one country.

There may be regional differences, but they’re tiny compared to Europe. We are one country; we don’t have places like Arizona saying they are going to become their own country, no-one thinks seriously about it. We’re very lucky historically, while in Europe you can travel 100km and you have a whole different culture, which is great for Americans as tourists coming to see very different societies and economies, but its hell for running economies.

That’s what they’re trying to overcome with the euro, but it’s very difficult.

If we turn back to current European affairs and the policy proposals to tackle the crisis, one of them was to exclude Structural Funds co-financing by national and regional governments from debt calculations. What do you think about such proposals to rewrite the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact?

Well, if you throw out enough bad, you can make anything look good in comparison. Let’s say clearly that it’s like the bank. All the bad loans are put into the bad bank. You can act like it doesn’t exist, but it does. You can’t write them off, you have to deal with them, and you’ve got to bail them out. I think in this case my preference would be not to take the route of redefining rules in this way. In the case of a country like Italy, with a government debt sitting at 134% GDP, if you keep co-financing of European funds out of debt calculations you’re excluding a lot of debt, but the debt still exists. I would rather just call spending what it is, especially if the decision is that the economic situation is so weak that we will rely on government spending. Accumulating spending and debt may not be efficient in the long run, but at least it satisfies a public urge right now.

4

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

I would rather see politicians deal with it, and say that if the deficit is going to be under 3% of GDP in the long run, it’s going to be 6% or 8% in the short term, rather than trying to redefine it and act as if you have to rediscover fiscal virginity, when in fact you have run up a huge deficit. I just don’t see the logic of inventing new rules to hide reality.

Another problem is that such proposals invite supposedly temporary expedients to become permanent. In other words, I suspect that this idea of a primary budget deficit, without expenditure linked to EU funds-financing, is going to be long lasting.

It was introduced with the idea that it’s a short term problem, due to a financial crisis and a way to say that countries have problems right now, and the government debts of the previous administration don’t have to be worried about. In the long run, that debt is still there, and if it isn’t addressed it will be

“In the case of a country like Italy, with a government debt sitting at 134% GDP, if you keep co-financing of European funds out of debt calculations you’re excluding a lot of debt, but the debt still exists. I would rather just call spending what it is, especially if the decision is that the economic situation is so weak that we will rely on government spending.”

there forever. I look at debt in relation to GDP – the precise number doesn’t matter, but it’s relevant to the size and competitiveness of the economy. If you restore rapid growth, and debt-to-GDP comes down, then fine. However, the risk is that they simply throw this out of the equation, and if the primary debt becomes the rule, politicians will act like none of this debt really exists.

So long-term reforms and competitiveness are much more important?

Yes they are, but you have to realise that I’m looking at this with an American bias, and this is an Anglo-Saxon approach. I think it is pretty close to the approach of the “Teutonic North” in the euro area, although from an American standpoint the Germans are way to the left in terms of social programmes and this goes back to Bismarck. He bought off the socialists by introducing the social state. From our standpoint even Germany is a lot further left than we are. Still, the whole idea here is what do you believe is important? Do you believe it is free enterprise or do you believe what the French do, that it is the government that is at the centre of decision making, including in the economic sphere,

in which case you get less excited about the reforms that we’re screaming about.

What do you think of the view that the euro is too strong?

If you look at history, the euro came in in 1999.

Between then and now, if Greece, Portugal and some other countries like Italy had not been in the Eurozone, they would have devalued two or three times, maybe more, because that was the normal way to address the issue of competitiveness and the fact that costs were high and productivity was low compared to their trading partners and competing countries.

They come to a point when they devalue and start all over, wiping out debt and bond holders, but it doesn’t work that way today. These countries can’t do that now, and that creates a serious problem for their competitiveness. What we have had in response to that is internal devaluations. For instance in Greece, wages are down a third from what they were during the crisis. Basically they cannot devalue the common currency, so they must cut their labour costs to deal with it, via internal devaluation. It’s kind of a painful exercise, but it’s a way of achieving the same goal.

On a euro-wide basis there is now a very deliberate attempt by Draghi to trash the euro. They don’t say that, but they want it because they think the earlier strength in the euro pushed down import prices, and that meant any competitors to import and service production had to reduce their prices or go out of business. This is what the ECB seems to believe, and that is the reason their year-on-year consumer price index (CPI) was 0.4% in October and they want 2% like all the other central banks.

They wanted it high enough that a glitch couldn’t cause deflation.

Finally, you are a very keen beekeeper. What has this activity taught you in relation to the economy and forecasting?

I am looking at a glass case at the other end of my office which has a pair of bee gloves in it. These are gloves which have padding to stop them stinging you. The idea is that bees’ stings can’t get through the gloves, but those ones are covered with little dots, which are stings. I was wearing them a few years ago around November, and it was a rainy day, which makes the bees mad. It was getting late in the day, and I had some things I had to do in the beehive, so I had no choice. The canvas of the gloves was wet, so it stuck to my skin, which meant the bees could get through and sting me. There must be at least 100 in each glove… I look at those gloves when we’re having trouble analysing the current economic situation or portfolios here, and I tell myself that life can be rougher, and it has been rougher. It puts things in perspective.

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

POLICY ANALYSIS

Why multilevel governance matters

T

he issues of decentralisation and devolution are discussed here from the viewpoint of the effectiveness of public policies, which is linked in a virtuous circle to ownership of those policies by individuals, public institutions and private companies. The very raison d’être of the Committee of the Regions resides in the awareness that local and regional authorities are crucial to the effectiveness of public policies. This is due to the fact that they have knowledge of their territories that the upper levels of government cannot have, powers and competences that give them a key role in many policy fields, and proximity to ordinary individuals, enabling them to listen, and speak, to them.

Irrespective of the extent of their competences, powers and resources, however, local and regional authorities’ room for manoeuvre is bound by a framework of external conditions that are out of their control, but on which the upper levels of government have an influence. Examples of this are EU and national regulations, availability of funds and/or other incentives at EU and country levels, administrative red tape, and soft and hard infrastructures that can only be made available at a higher level of government.

To maximize the effectiveness and legitimacy of public policies, the assets of local and regional authorities need to be invested according to the principles of partnership and multilevel governance.

To maximize the effectiveness of a policy, the different levels of government should work in partnership to design and implement that policy.

This includes not only identifying shared goals and targets, but also coordinating and integrating agendas along a common timeline in order to secure synergies and systemic effects. Partnership means involvement, and involvement increases ownership, which in turn, in a virtuous circle, makes delivery more effective.

Multilevel governance, as defined by the Committee of the Regions, is “coordinated action by the European Union, the Member States and local and regional authorities, based on partnership and aimed at drawing up and implementing EU policies1“. Within this context, respect for the principle of subsidiarity – whereby competences and resources must be allocated to the level of government which is closest to the general public (and) which can use them effectively – is a 1 Opinion of the Committee of the Regions (2012) – Building a European Culture of Multilevel Governance: Follow-Up to the Committee of the Regions’ White Paper, page 7.

prerequisite for effective multilevel governance, but is not sufficient. Therefore, whatever a country’s situation in terms of constitutional layout (federal, centralised, decentralised) and institutional trends (decentralisation, devolution), what counts most is the need to set proper conditions for effective multilevel governance arrangements.

needs a territorial dimension (setting regionally differentiated objectives and targets to take into account differentiated situations and potential) and multilevel governance approaches. In addition to increased policy effectiveness, multilevel governance would make the policy-making process more transparent and inclusive, spreading ownership of the strategy and its outcome.

Europe 2020 and multilevel governance The same applies to EU policies, and the ongoing mid-term review of the Europe 2020 strategy is a good example. Europe 2020 was launched in 2010 to boost smart, sustainable and inclusive growth in the EU. The five headline targets of the strategy are underpinned by seven flagship initiatives and its governance is based on the open method of coordination. A mid-term review is now ongoing, and a revised version of the strategy is expected in early 2015 for the second half of its

“Athens Declaration asks for multilevel governance and a territorial dimension to be taken on board in the European Semester.”

life cycle. It is widely accepted that Europe 2020 has not delivered on its promises so far and that this is not only due to the impact of the economic crisis. The Committee of the Regions, in its Athens Declaration2, has identified the challenges facing the renewed Europe 2020 strategy: it 2 Athens Declaration on the mid-term review of Europe 2020: “A Territorial Vision for Growth and Jobs”, and accompanying Mid-Term Assessment Report, 7 March 2014 http://portal.cor.europa.eu/europe2020/Pages/MTAR.aspx.

While the Athens Declaration asks for multilevel governance and a territorial dimension to be taken on board in the European Semester (the Annual Growth Survey, the National Reform Programmes and the Country-Specific Recommendations), tentative approaches are already in place whereby the National Reform Programmes are designed in partnership. In Italy, for instance, the Conference of the Regions has set up an ad hoc regional team (RETE NRP) in charge of coordinating and forwarding regional contributions as an integral part of the NRP. A different approach has been adopted in Sweden where, although the subnational level does not officially contribute to the process of drafting the NRP to which it provides an appendix, interaction between all stakeholders at all levels is ensured by means of six consultations each year on Europe 2020. The Committee of the Regions’ 5th Monitoring Report on Europe 2020 devotes an entire chapter to multilevel governance issues, presenting a series of good practices in the field. Governance modes vary from informal approaches, such as Local Strategic Partnerships (LSP) or Local Enterprise Partnerships in the UK, to contractual arrangements, such as the Contrats de Projets État-Région (CPER) in France or the conventions in Luxembourg, involving multiple actors from different tiers of government as well as relevant stakeholders, e.g. from the private sector.

These examples show that, while there is no onesize-fits all solution, specific multilevel governance arrangements can and should be worked out to ensure effective delivery and broad ownership of the renewed Europe 2020 strategy.

REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

5

SPECIAL FEATURE

6

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

Decentralising power to the regions: What next for Europe?

REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

7

WHAT NEXT FOR EUROPE? Interview with Charles Ricq, Emeritus Professor of the University of Geneva

I am not worried by what some are calling the break-up of Europe

O

n the occasion of this edition focusing on the revival of regionalist movements and the Scottish referendum, we met an eminent expert on regional questions, Emeritus Professor of the University of Geneva, Charles Ricq. Professor Ricq is an adviser to the Council of Europe and the European Commission. He is also secretary-general of the European Centre for Observation of the Regions (COEUR) in Geneva.

In the course of the interview he stressed that it was important to speak not of a Europe of regions but of a Europe with regions. This is the same message as that put across in the recent report by Luc Van den Brande, former president of the Committee of the Regions, on European Multilevel Governance, on the basis of the subsidiarity principle, which was reaffirmed in the Treaty of Lisbon.

Professor, you are the director of the European Centre for Observation of the Regions, set up by Denis de Rougemont in 1974. For some years now we have been witnessing a revival of regionalism. And yet the region remains a diverse political entity. Could you begin by defining a region?

The diversity and complexity of the regional phenomenon in Europe makes it necessary to use an interdisciplinary definition. The first definition comes from public law. Both the Council of Europe, with its 47 Member States, and the European Union, with its 28 Member States, define European regions as the political and/or administrative level immediately below that of the State.

To this should be added various economic, sociological and philosophical approaches. I will quote only one of these, which takes account of various parameters: a region is made up of a territorial area marked, in way specific to it, by geography, history, economics and sustainable development and, now, by an ever greater demographic mix, by religion – the old principle cuius regio, eius religio – and by cultural aspects in the broad sense, embracing language and identity.

Every region can assign priority or greater importance to a given parameter, without losing sight of what my intellectual mentor, Denis de Rougemont, used to say: “What counts for the regions is not size but powers”.

Does the new need for a regional identity reflect our loss of bearings, a kind of search for a tangible and comprehensible

8

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

homeland, proximity in a complex and globalised world?

In an era of globalisation, particularly in its economic and financial but also social aspects, each individual, in a kind of dialectical process, seeks for bearings, geographical, historical, political and cultural landmarks, as a basis for his personal and collective identity and in order to map out a territory to which he belongs. I would, however, immediately add that the identity phenomenon, which moulds each of us and each of our regions, is always situated in time, a process constantly in motion, and I would break it down into three phases: “memory identity”, based on a personal or collective past; “action identity”, for facing up to the socio-economic, political and cultural changes of our times; and finally “projection identity”, which reflects the medium and long-term projects which any individual or collective entity devises for the future.

In what way are the regional autonomy or secessionist movements that we have seen recently in Scotland and Catalonia different from those observed in the 1970s and 1980s?

Reflecting on regional autonomy requires a clear distinction to be made between regionalisation and regionalism, which many writers and politicians blithely confuse. While regionalisation involves the political and/or administrative techniques which every State uses for its current or future territorial organisation – often assigning greater weight to economic parameters – regionalism, in sociological terms, means a territorial entity developing an awareness of what it was, is and would

like to be. Regionalism can therefore give rise to political movements (rather than political parties) often calling for more autonomy, and sometimes it leads to even greater forms of self-affirmation, when regionalism becomes nationalism.

Every democratic State, whatever its political system, must attempt to strike a successful balance between the two phenomena of regionalisation and regionalism. I am, for example, curious to see what transpires in the region of Alsace in the near future. Personally, in order to analyse the regional phenomenon in Europe in greater depth, I think it is essential to analyse the separatist phenomenon by type: this can range from moderation to violent extremism. As an example of this I would cite the emergence of a new federal state in Switzerland, the new Swiss canton of Jura, established in January 1978, which was democratically accepted by the whole Swiss people and the 25 other cantons.

Is it possible to sketch an outline of regionalisation in Europe?

Regional autonomy also requires serious analysis, as it has many forms, all of which to a greater or lesser extent are calling for new powers, whether economic, social, fiscal, cultural or legislative. To put this in highly formal terms, four main political systems have developed in Europe over the course of history, all of them democratic I would stress: centralised States, decentralised States, where regions have only regulatory powers, regionalised States, where they have legislative powers, and federal States, where the regions may even have exclusive powers alongside powers delegated by, or shared with, central government.

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

in Europe it facilitates the generation of real synergy focusing on its economic integration, its social model, cultural diversity, and land-use planning by means of the underlying principles that mark this Europe of ours: democracy, the rule of law, solidarity, spiritual values, economic, social and territorial cohesion, and subsidiarity

Photo by Liene Purple, Latvia

For both the states and the regions of the European Union, all these basic principles demonstrate that solidarity is impossible without interdependence (as in the case of migration), and that neither can there be autonomy without interdependence (for example, fiscal transfers between regions). Subsidiarity cannot exist in the absence of solidarity.

Has the financial crisis intensified the transformation of regionalist movements and their nationalist offshoots by means of a more economic and social approach, highlighting the rift between “South” and “North”, between “poor” and “rich” regions?

What can we say about the calls for independence currently emanating from places such as Scotland, Catalonia or Dutchspeaking Belgium, as well as from some border regions?

Other than meeting or restoring these claims, the only thing states can do – if they have not already done so – is to embark on a lengthy process of federalisation, granting their regions more and more powers. The United Kingdom is an interesting case: although the very word “federalism” is anathema to the British state, the fact that it is granting broader responsibilities – even tax powers – to Scotland shows that this same state is shifting towards a process of federalisation. Then again, I would point out that even in federal states, a real exchange either exists or is developing between centralising and decentralising forces in those countries.

What difference is there between the process of federalisation in the Member States and the federalisation of the European Union, which seems to be evolving towards a “federal structure”?

Let’s talk about European integration which also uses, and will increasingly use, what Jacques Delors called “federal structures” – in other words, launching protracted and complex federalisation processes in order to lay more solid political, economic, social and cultural foundations for Europe.

We might also look back to Winston Churchill’s Zurich speech in 1947 about the “United States of Europe”.

To those EU states that still cling to the “intergovernmental method”, spurning the “Community method”, we could point out that – and this simply common sense – that “shared sovereignty” does not mean loss of sovereignty. On the contrary,

I do not believe that these regionalist movements can be explained first and foremost by the financial crisis; each region, just like each state, has experienced this in its own way since September 2008 (the Lehmann Brothers collapse). Regional-

“I would like to see the Committee of the Regions rapidly put forward a fully-fledged charter for regional governance.”

ist movements are primarily grounded in identitybased, cultural or indeed linguistic demands, which may of course overlay socio-economic inequalities that cause resentment. Perhaps we should, for example, aspire to a European Union that encourages conflict-free bilingualism or multilingualism everywhere, while of course respecting national and/ or regional languages. The threefold cohesion – economic, social and territorial – that the Treaty of Lisbon called for in 2009 would, in the more or less long term, effectively help to strike a new balance across European territory. The condition is that adequate structural funds, through the 2020 strategy for example, should not be partially called into question all the time.

Could regionalisation become a fresh source of instability for the European Union?

As I am unshakeably optimistic about European integration in the long term, I think it would be premature to claim that new “state-regions” or “region-states” would disrupt the European venture. Both Scotland and Catalonia sometimes even look more European than the states to which they belong! But I would rather use the pleasing image

of a mosaic – like the one in Ravenna – to define Europe. Europe’s unity and diversity constitute a delicate mosaic. But its pattern and even more its design for the future – the most important aspect – must be constantly enhanced by each new element, nation-state or region-state. The latter would then act as a kind of “internal enlargement” of the European Union.

At this point, we could apply two concepts and practices derived from demographic, economic, political and sociological science – in other words, “mixing” and “meshing”, both of which show how Europe is at the same time one and diverse, both culturally and economically. So, I have no fear of what some describe as Europe splintering – after all, you don’t look at a mosaic’s pieces one-by-one, however different they are, but as part of the overall pattern.

How can we build a Europe that is united in its diversity?

I would like to finish by emphasising, as Denis de Rougemont did, that we should speak in terms not of a “Europe of the regions”, but of Europe “with the regions”. Such is the message that the Committee of the Regions’ recent report on multilevel governance in Europe has voiced – on the basis of subsidiarity, as reaffirmed in the Treaty of Lisbon.

For my part, I would supplement the vertical level of governance for distributing powers between European institutions, states and regions, with a horizontal level as part of a dialectical movement – in other words, “multi-actor governance” which, in a given region, would bind together all the actors of genuine regional governance – even cross-border governance – involving elected representatives, socio-economic or cultural office holders, and civil society. I would like to see the Committee of the Regions rapidly put forward a fully-fledged charter for regional governance – the Council of Europe having “set aside” the Charter of Local Self-Government in 2008. I would again emphasise that the regions are at the heart of Europe and Europe is at the heart of the regions.

Since studying philosophy, economics and sociology (in Paris, Rome and Brussels), Charles Ricq, professor emeritus at the University of Geneva, has dedicated his life to applying Denis de Rougement’s vision to his research and teaching on European integration, institutions, economics, territory, frontiers, identity and culture, in particular in its border regions. He is a scientific adviser to the Council of Europe in Strasbourg and the European Commission in Brussels. He is also secretary-general of the Centre d’Observation Européen des Régions (European Observatory of the Regions) in Geneva.

REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

9

SPECIAL FEATURE

Scotland leads renewed hope in devolution process Stewart Maxwell (EA/UK), Member of Scottish Parliament, Vice-President of the EA Group

fuel poverty. The Scottish Parliament should have the power to establish a welfare system that better reflects Scotland’s values, ensures fair and decent support for those that need it most – a system that protects the vulnerable and supports households.

A

s the dust settles after September’s referendum in Scotland, the political agenda has shifted urgently towards devolving substantial new powers to the Scottish Parliament.

For Westminster, keeping up appearances simply won’t do any longer. In the lead up to the referendum the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat leaders all vowed Scotland would get further devolution. As a result, the UK is about to endure a constitutional overhaul.

However, the divergence of views amongst Westminster parties on how to deliver their own devolution proposals is deafening. Amidst party political wrangling, the opportunity for change is falling dangerously further into a vacuum with very little action on delivering the promises made to Scotland’s voters in September. Despite receiving an invite from the Commons Committee on Political and Constitutional Reform, it is incredible that not one of the UK party leaders attended the discussion to set out their vision for further devolution.

Westminster has a democratic responsibility to deliver on its promises to the Scottish people.

There is a great deal of expectation on the Smith Commission which has been set up to oversee the transition of powers from Westminster to Holyrood. Garnering representation from all political parties, this Commission has the legitimacy and accountability to foster a new programme of powers with a purpose for the Scottish Parliament. It must deliver on three critical issues; financial powers to allow us to make Scotland more prosperous, powers to make Scotland fairer and an increased voice for Scotland in the world.

10

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

The Scottish National Party of which I am a member believes strongly that in order to build sustainable growth with key investment in young people Scotland needs full fiscal responsibility. In particular, the Scottish Parliament should have full control over income tax, national insurance, corporation tax, capital gains tax, fuel duty, air passenger duty and inheritance tax. These levers will create a framework aimed at ensuring those taxes which Scotland has control of will be operated efficiently, fairly and in the public interest.

“The Scottish Parliament should have the power to establish a welfare system that better reflects Scotland’s values.”

Last year Scotland’s economy grew, unemployment fell, exports rose and investment soared. But Westminster’s austerity agenda and cuts to benefits mean poverty remains a scandalous reality in Scotland’s communities today. It is a disgrace that a nation rich in natural resources faces a growing number of children in poverty and pensioners in

Scotland’s valued relationship with Europe is under direct threat from the Eurosceptic agenda at Westminster. There can be no complacency on the urgency to protect Scotland’s membership of the EU and it must start representing itself directly on devolved matters. Scotland’s role must be codified in a written constitution like every other European nation. This will represent its political principles and values and – crucially – will encapsulate the fundamental democratic claim in Scotland: the people are sovereign.

The display of democratic devolution in Scotland is a leading light for Europe in delivering substantial powers to local authorities and regions. There is no doubt in the ability of Europe’s regions and cities to deliver economic growth, investment and the fruits of cultural and educational projects. What we need is the political will, as we see now in Scotland, to identify and devolve more powers. There are two fundamental points which accentuate the need for the decentralisation of power across Europe. First of all, the people that live and work in a region are best placed to make the decisions for that region.

Secondly, the connection between the public and local politics is close enough for strengthening trust and transparency in the political process.

Finally, the people who have the biggest stake in a successful Scotland are those who live and work there. That’s why it’s so important the Smith Commission is open to suggestions from the Scottish public. The people of a region are naturally going to be much quicker at identifying its economic strengths, weaknesses and social values upon which to build a sustainable future.

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

REPORT Thibaut Madelin, special correspondent in Offenburg

Welcome to “Zero Debt” Town

T

he town of Offenburg in Baden-Württemberg is proud to have eliminated its debt. This was achieved through an austerity policy supported widely by its citizens and by the parties of the left and right wing. The plan decided on in 1999 – when this pretty Baden-Württemberg town reported a debt of 61 million euros – is today complete five years ahead of schedule.

T

hree, two, one ... zero! At 5 p.m. on Tuesday 20 May 2014, the people of Offenburg jubilantly count the seconds separating their municipality from a historic achievement: total freedom from debt. Good reason to clink glasses and sing the regional anthem. “We want to celebrate today properly, since this has been a joint achievement”, explains Edith Schreiner, the town’s Christian Democrat (CDU) mayor. Today, the home page of Offenburg’s internet site proudly displays a counter announcing “debt-free”.

Offenburg’s zero debt was particularly welcomed by one of its residents: Wolfgang Schäuble. “This has been achieved through the hard work of the authorities and the municipal council,” said the German finance minister, who is the local Member of Parliament. At federal level he is pursuing an equal ambitious goal, namely to balance the budget or not take on new debt in 2015. The “schwarze Null” (literally “black zero”), in contrast to the “red figures”, is the holy grail of German policy.

Although this town of 58 000 people located 20 km from the French border has a strong industrial base which yields plentiful business taxes, its battle to become “debt free” was not entirely smooth. In 2003 the municipal team faced a collapse in tax receipts owing to fiscal reform and a lacklustre economy. Edith Schreiner, together with her acting municipal councillor in charge of finance Christoph Jopen, a member of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), therefore decided to cut the municipality’s operating costs by 10% over five years. Staff who retired were not replaced, while property taxes were raised so as to maintain priority investment in nursery schools.

The weight of history

Quest for “black zero” “Austerity on its own is not the right way, you also need investment,” stresses Christoph Jopen, who retired on 30 June. “Without investment there would never have been the necessary acceptance,” adds the mayor. All political parties have in fact consistently endorsed this policy and public support has been unwavering, according to Helmut Seller, a journalist at the Badische Zeitung. For example, when there was not enough money to renovate a building that had been used for decades for school field trips and the local authority was planning to demolish it, people raised funds and builders worked without payment to help finance the work.

“The black zero has inevitably acquired symbolic value for the CDU in relation to countries such as France,” explains Torsten Oppelland, professor of politics at Jena University. “It is supposed to prove that a policy of fiscal consolidation can be pursued without leading to disaster:” But with Europe again threatened by crisis, Berlin is under unprecedented pressure from the IMF, ECB and its European partners to stimulate investment.

Even if that means abandoning the objective that German economists themselves regard as a badge of honour. “We would be mad to jeopardise the confidence that German budgetary discipline creates in the markets,” was Mr Schäuble’s response to them in mid-October.

“In 2003, Edith Schreiner, the town’s Christian Democrat (CDU) Mayor, together with her acting municipal councillor in charge of finance Christoph Jopen, a member of the Social Democratic Party (SPD), decided to cut the municipality’s operating costs by 10% over five years.”

Although not unique, Offenburg’s example explains what drives this policy which, according to a Forsa poll published by the Handelsblatt newspaper on 16 October, is endorsed by 54% of Germans. In a way, Offenburg’s inhabitants provide the model for Angela Merkel and Wolfgang Schäuble. “We should just have asked a Swabian housewife,” declared the German chancellor in 2008 at the height of the financial crisis. “She would have told us that you cannot keep living beyond your means for ever.” The mayor of Offenburg, who is Swabian herself and proud of this regional character trait, absolutely agrees. She wants to do the same as citizens who “do not pass on debts to their children”.

This is the same reasoning as that of the French “bon père de famille”. But aversion to debt and the concern to save are much more deeply rooted in the German psyche. “We have lived through currency depreciation twice in the space of one generation,” explains Helmut Becker, director of Offenburg’s Sparkasse, the savings bank. Everybody is familiar with these historical events, because we have heard about them from our parents.” Although the 1923 period of hyperinflation is often talked REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

11

REPORT

leaving my children with a millstone around their necks, and nor can the state.” This might make a Keynesian smile, but the argument is cogent in a country where births have been falling since 1964: the public debt is carried by fewer and fewer people, that is to say fewer and fewer taxpayers. This trend worries people both in Offenburg, where one quarter of the population is over the age of 60, and in Berlin. “Germany faces a demographic challenge on quite a different scale from France”, Angela Merkel pointed out in September to Manuel Valls, the French prime minister.

“We should just have asked a Swabian housewife. She would have told us that you cannot keep living beyond your means for ever.”

Angela Merkel, German Chancellor

about, the monetary reform of 1948 was equally momentous. Three years after the war, Germans saw what remained of their assets melt like snow in the sun when the rate of exchange became one Deutsche Mark to ten Reichsmark. According to an R+V survey, inflation is the Germans’ greatest fear. Although Germany’s savings rate has been decreasing for several years, it is still one of the highest in Europe. They may be only seventeen, but Daniel Beierbach and Jan Ücker, students at Offenburg’s technical college, share this mindset.

“It’s important to put money aside for a rainy day,” they say. And they approve of the government’s intention not take on new debt if it can avoid doing so.

The savings banks, or Sparkassen, which count 50 million customers out of a population of 81 million, play a key role in passing on this culture of saving, which finances their activities. On 30 October, the Sparkassen celebrated World Savings Day, an event that started in Milan in 1924 and is still very popular in Germany. Traditionally on this day children come to the Sparkasse to break their piggy-banks and put the money into a bank account. They receive presents such as cups, balls or coloured pencils as an incentive. The aim is of course to win future customers. “But we also want to teach young people to manage their money well and not spend more than they earn,” explains Becker.

company from his father, who set it up in 1968, and he cherishes the hope that his children will take it over from him one day, though he would not put pressure on them to do so. A family company is also constrained: it cannot be listed on the stock market and must limit its debts as much as possible.

This way of doing things means that Huber, which employs 250 people and is enjoying 10% growth, is in a position to finance a new building from its own resources.

Offenburg’s zero debt was particularly welcomed by one of its residents: Wolfgang Schäuble. “This has been achieved through the hard work of the authorities and the municipal council,” said the German finance Minister, who is the local Member of Parliament.

Daniel Huber fully approves of the “zero debt” programme which the government holds so dear. “For the first time, policy is doing what we ordinary people are doing”, he says. “I cannot take on debt and die

Key points •

The demographic challenge Daniel Huber does not question these precepts.

Manager and shareholder of Huber, an Offenburg company that makes high-precision thermoregulatory equipment, he epitomises the Mittelstand, the SME sector which employs 60% of Germany’s entire workforce. He inherited the

12

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

Is there ultimately a religious dimension to the politics of this pastor’s daughter? Frank Wellhöner, dean of the Protestant church in Offenburg, points to the origins of pietism, the Lutheran movement that advocates sobriety and which is ingrained in the Swabian housewife. These are values that he shares. “The Protestant church in Baden has no debts”, he proclaims, with his budget in one hand and Bible in the other. But what would God think of the balanced budget, which some treat as holy writ? “That would be speculation”, replies his colleague, pastor Christian Kühlewein-Roloff, who is preaching in the presence of Wolfgang Schäuble on Sunday. Is it a matter of political prestige and brownie points, or is the purpose to open up new opportunities for society? “If mankind benefits, then that is a good thing.” The parishioners can be happy, at any event: eliminating its debt has enabled Offenburg to plan the construction of a new swimming-pool to replace the one dating from 1936, which has been waiting to be renovated for over ten years.

The budget of over 36 million euros will be financed partly

by Offenburg Technical Services (TBO). This b o dy, wh ic h r u n s municipal infrastructure (water, electricity and roads), now has a debt of EUR 76 million. The town hall was careful not to include that in the municipal accounts.

•

On 20 May 2014, Offenburg, the town where German finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble lives, celebrated with great fanfare its freedom from debt, a target set in 1999 and accomplished five years ahead of schedule.

The political parties (SPD on the left and CDU on the right) and Offenburg residents all backed this project, despite the budget cuts it imposed.

•

An emblematic achievement in a country that is very attached to saving and that does not want to “pass on debts to its children”.

•

The “zero debt” ideal is a consequence of the chaos experienced during the two post-war periods, but also of concern provoked by the country’s population decline.

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

EXTERNAL RELATIONS Lucia Mrázová, special correspondent in Istanbul

EU-Turkey relations: Challenges for 2015

T

urkey may have become a candidate country on the same day as Croatia – 3 October 2005 – but its progress towards EU membership has been far less rosy. While Croatia became the 28th Member State in July 2013, the latest report from the outgoing Commission calls Ankara’s recent progress in accession negotiations the worst since the first report back in 1998. To make matters worse, the new Juncker Commission is adamant that the Union needs to take a breather from enlargement for a few years, with any efforts being targeted at countries in the Western Balkans. In this climate, does Turkey’s membership stand any chance at all?

E

ven last year’s fiftieth anniversary of the start of diplomatic relations – since when Turkey has invested more than half its time trying to join the EU’s ranks – brought little cheer. Since 2005, when the Union began official accession negotiations, only 14 out of 35 chapters have been opened. But this is not just about a lack of consensus among the Member States on whether and how Turkey can be brought in. Question marks over the country’s domestic policy under its popular president Erdoğan are playing into the hands of those who cannot see the two sides finding common ground at this time.

Enlargement and neighbourhood portfolios merged So far the Juncker Commission has done nothing to kindle Ankara’s hopes and it is clear that the 75-million-strong, predominantly Muslim, country will not be joining the Union on its watch. In the new Commission the entire EU enlargement portfolio was shifted at the last minute to the Commissioner for neighbourhood policy, Austrian Johannes Hahn. This juggling act again feeds speculation that the Commission has put enlargement on the back burner.

Hahn is an old hand when it comes to Turkey, having visited the country a number of times as Commissioner for regional development. At his hearing before the European Parliament, however, he stressed that Turkey could only expect to make any headway in negotiations if its government embraced fundamental rights and a reform agenda. While the Austrian is taking over the technical side of negotiations, it is the Italian Frederica Mogherini, the new face of EU foreign policy, who will be handling political dialogue with Ankara. What cannot be overlooked is that

Turkey, despite being the biggest country lining up for EU membership, did not even rate a mention in Juncker’s statement on the new Commission’s priorities. Pride of place here went to negotiations with the Western Balkans countries.

Support for accession slumps to 20% These days Turkey’s erstwhile prime-minister and newly elected president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, is known for not mincing his words when it comes to Europe. However, the nationalist rhetoric that has wowed Turkey’s voters for the past ten years has been mitigated by the somewhat more diplomatic moves signalled by the new Europe minister, Volkan Bozkır, since taking office. His new EU strategy seeks to improve the reform process and consolidate communication channels not only from Turkey to the EU, but also to the domestic population.

Frustration at what Turkey sees as a humiliating accession process is reflected in historically low support for joining the EU. As high as 73% just before official accession negotiations kicked off, the figure is now barely 20% and falling, according to the German Marshall Fund. The belief that the Union is applying double standards, its refusal to open new negotiation chapters, as well as ongoing political disagreements with Member States (such as Cyprus) only serve to stoke anti-EU sentiment.

However, the heavy-handed routing of antigovernment demonstrations, a huge government graft scandal and the government’s clumsy attempts to fend off criticism – by snooping on web use and blocking some social networks – are not something the EU can accept.

Three major challenges for Turkey in 2015 Turkey remains a key partner for both the Union and the Commission, its geostrategic position now more crucial than ever. While Europe is tightening up its visa regime and borders, Turkey has become the most important shield protecting it from tides of immigrants from Syria and providing a haven to more than a million refugees fleeing war and Islamist militants.

Another element to factor in is the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership between the Union and the US and what effect progress in negotiations will have on the EU-Turkey customs union. The World Bank’s view is that Turkey should not only be involved in these negotiations but should also launch parallel talks with the USA and eventually take part in the partnership in its own right.

Meanwhile, Juncker, Mogherini and Hahn will also have to work with Turkey on promised visa relaxation. This will top the agenda of negotiations next year, since Ankara has been promised visa requirements will be scrapped as early as 2016.

But even collaboration on combating terrorism and visa relaxation will be of no use to Turkey until the country, beset by manifest problems in fundamental human rights issues and the rule of law, gets back on track towards a better constitutional set-up. If it cannot find a way to reconcile domestic politics and its European ambitions, its accession will still be off the radar when the Juncker Commission leaves office five years from now.

REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

13

EXTERNAL RELATIONS

ARLEM to debate migration, waste and urban governance

T

he Turkish city of Antalya is hosting ARLEM’s 6th plenary session on 14-15 December 2014. Local and regional representatives from EU Member States and non-EU Mediterranean countries will discuss important issues ranging from migration to waste management and urban governance.

The plenary session will begin with the presentation and adoption of the annual report on The state of the territorial dimension of the Union for the Mediterranean, which also sets political recommendations for the coming years.

ARLEM emphasises that the EU must continue to be the primary strategic partner for southern and eastern Mediterranean countries and to help

them towards a prosperous and peaceful future. A debate will follow on the state of decentralisation in the Euro-Mediterranean region. ARLEM intends to support the decentralisation and development of multi-level governance. In order to achieve this, it is vital to strengthen the institutional capacity of local and regional authorities. ARLEM is also calling for a cohesion policy which promotes south-south cooperation and is supported by funding from the EU’s neighbourhood policy.

The management of migration flows in the EuroMediterranean area has been a hot topic in recent years. The plenary session will adopt a report drafted by CoR member and Mayor of Lisbon, Antonio Costa, on the local and regional authorities’

role in this management. Environmental issues will also be the subject of a discussion based on a report on local and regional waste management. In order to face the challenges created by increasing urbanisation, ARLEM will present an initiative for an urban agenda for the Mediterranean. The initiative is designed to strengthen the institutional and administrative capacities of cities and regions in urban governance.

This will be the last plenary session held under the current CoR mandate and will be co-chaired

by CoR president Michel Lebrun and Ali Abd ElRahmen, Governor of Giza (Egypt).

Working group on Turkey focuses on Human Rights

T

he Committee of the Regions working group on relations with Turkey met on 25 November in the Turkish city of Giresun.

The participants discussed the state of the accession negotiations between the EU and Turkey and their impact on local and regional authorities. Local democracy and the promotion of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and an ECHR-compatible legal framework, including gender equality strategies and respect for ethnic and religious minorities, figured on the meeting agenda.

The working group, chaired by Heinz Lehmann (DE/EPP), Member of Sachsen State Assembly, also pointed out that the Union will need to look beyond enlargement and examine the need for further internal consolidation. Whilst the

14

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

consolidation process is going on inside the country, the main task of the enlargement negotiations will be to prepare the candidate countries in the best way possible. Members of the working group also debated the 2014 Enlargement package and the Strategy and progress report on Turkey adopted on 8 October. The Report stressed that “an ECHR-compatible legal framework has to be established on matters of faith and conscientious objection. Substantial efforts are needed to effectively guarantee the rights of women (…)

Turkey needs to ensure full respect for all property rights, including those of non-Muslim religious communities. These shortcomings need to be addressed and the authorities need to enhance efforts to protect other fundamental rights and freedoms so that all citizens can exercise their rights without hindrance.”

Since 2005, when Turkey started accession negotiations, the country has been a strategic partner for the European Union. Its dynamic economy provides a valuable contribution to the prosperity of the European continent. The very serious developments in the region, in particular in Syria and Iraq, make cooperation on foreign policy issues even more critical.

Turkey’s strategic location also underlines the importance of further cooperation in the areas of migration policy and energy security.

The value of such cooperation has become even clearer in light of the considerable challenges posed by recent developments in our joint neighbourhood, including the Ukraine crisis.

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

EUROPCOM 2014

EuroPCom 2014: Imag[in]ing Europe

T

he fifth edition of EuroPCom, the European Conference on Public Communication, took place on 15 and 16 October 2014 in Brussels. The conference brought together communication managers and senior experts of local, regional, national and European authorities. Over 700 colleagues from all EU Member States attended this networking event. Lectures, debates and interactive workshops focused on major challenges in both EU and public communication. Many of the debates focussed on the call for a new EU communication strategy, as proposed by the CoR in its upcoming own-initiative opinion “Reconnecting Europe with its citizens”. All presentations, summaries, videos and other conference material are available on www.cor.europa.eu/europcom

In his welcome address, the Committee of the Regions President Michel Lebrun emphasised that, “No communications strategy, no advertising campaign will have any impact on public opinion and civic commitment to the EU unless they reflect a deeper vision of Europe. We need to be clearer about the Union’s values and ambitions. We need more straight talking to bring people together in support of a decentralised European project that fosters both participation and creativity.”

In his opening speech, European Council President Herman Van Rompuy insisted on the need for “positive language” about Europe and called on politicians at all levels to “speak publicly of their European conviction”. He further noted: “What citizens expect from Europe is to be stronger outside, be more caring inside. This is where we must communicate Europe in words and deeds”.

During the EuroPCom opening session, followed by a specific workshop to consult its stakeholders, the Committee presented its proposal for a five-year communication plan on “Reconnecting Europe with its citizens”. CoR rapporteur Christophe Rouillon, Mayor of Coulaines and Vice-President of the Association of French Mayors, pointed out that, “We need a more long-term communication strategy, not just instant communication”.

REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

15

EUROPCOM 2014

This year’s EuroPCom also saw the second edition of the European Public Communication Award to honour outstanding EU-related communication campaigns and projects developed by a national, regional or local authority. The award went to

the Finnish fact-checking project “Faktabaari” (“Fact bar”) which, against the backdrop of the 2014 European elections, helped boost the factual content of the political debate by addressing common misconceptions of the EU. Second

and third prize went to the cooperation project between the Carinthian government and regional public television, and to the French annual “Joli mois de l’Europe”.

Focussing on innovation and creativity, this year’s conference offered plenty of opportunities for interactive discussions among the participants.

Several conversation sessions were held, allowing

the experts to share their stories and exchange their expertise. The debates were also triggered by the drawings produced by the Drawnalism team, visualising the main themes and questions.

One of the more controversial keynote speeches was given by the French advertising guru Jacques Séguéla of the Havas Group. He underlined that, “it was time to consolidate EU communications around one unique brand, without excluding decentralised communication, whilst also taking into account the specific features and identities of the Member States and regions”.

In the plenary closing session, the Italian journalist Marco Zatterin and his Danish colleague Per Nyholm shared their views on the future communication approach for Europe and the potential of a new shared narrative for the EU. They both favoured an optimistic and qualitydriven strategy.

16

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

Christophe Rouillon, Mayor of Coulaines

We need to put cities and regions at the heart of communicating Europe

C

hristophe Rouillon, Mayor of Coulaines and Vice-President of the Association of French Mayors responsible for Europe, will present his owninitiative opinion, “Reconnecting Europe with its citizens: more and better communication at local level”, on the role of local and regional authorities in communication at the next plenary session. We met up with him for this edition of EuroPCom to tell you about his belief in, and enthusiasm for, a form of decentralised communication operating on a level that is closer to Europe’s citizens.

Why did you want to be the rapporteur for this particular opinion?

The results of the last European elections testify loud and clear to the public’s disenchantment with politics in general. When the first direct elections to the European Parliament were held in 1979, the turnout was close to 65%. Since then, it has fallen every year to a level of around 40% for the last elections in 2014. The rise in votes for Eurosceptic parties (now with over 100 MEPs) and the record low turnout stand as a dire warning, calling for prompt action. Although the task ultimately falls to the European institutions to come up with a new communications strategy for discussing the European project, the strategy must embrace all levels of governance in Europe’s 100 000 municipalities and regions.

What are the broad outlines of this opinion?

The aim of the 2015-2019 Communication Plan “Reconnecting Europe with its citizens” is to kick off a discussion with people about their expectations from Europe and to ensure that, by the time the next elections are held in 2019, a majority will be convinced that “their voice counts in the European Union”. The Committee of the Regions opinion that I am presenting sets specific and measurable targets and proposes, in particular, that 20% of the EU’s communication budget be decentralised to national and local level. I am also suggesting that, together with the European Parliament and the Commission, we hold a series of “citizens’ dialogues” every year in regions and cities the length and breadth of Europe. Consideration might be given to the idea of asking that every region in Europe be visited at least once a year by a European commissioner. Finally, we would like to set up a network of European municipalities, cities and regions called “Friends of Europe” by 2019.

What is the role for the Committee of the Regions in that respect?

“The plan proposed in my opinion places the regions, cities and local and national media resolutely at the heart of a decentralised communications strategy to be operated jointly with the other European institutions and the Member States. “

The plan proposed in my opinion places the regions, cities and local and national media resolutely at the heart of a decentralised communications strategy to be operated jointly with the other European institutions and the Member States. This plan should both stimulate “a European narrative” that will open up a public debate in Europe on the historical, cultural, philosophical and sociological foundations of European integration and, at the same time, pave the way for a dialogue on the tangible impact of European policies on people’s daily lives.

REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

17

OPEN DAYS 2014

12th European Week of Regions and Cities

W

ith 6000 EU cohesion policy practitioners from all over Europe taking part in more than 100 workshops, the OPEN DAYS 2014 – 12th European Week of Regions and Cities – proved once again to be the world’s most important event in the field of regional and urban policies. This year’s event was held at a time when 500 investment plans co-funded by EU regional policy are being negotiated with the European Commission and are expected to be launched in 2015. Over four days, EU regional and local leaders discussed how to make the most of the reformed EU cohesion policy – worth more than EUR 350 billion over the coming seven years. In front of 800 local, regional, national and EU politicians, OECD Secretary-General José Ángel Gurría presented the main findings of two OECD reports on regional development trends. “The regional convergence engine has stalled since the crisis took effect. National standards of well-being are not felt equally by people living in different regions,” said Mr Gurría, adding that “Smarter public investment, especially in cities, and reforms of outdated local government structures would help to address this.” Michel Lebrun, President of the Committee of the Regions, called for sufficient financial resources to be made available to reimburse local and regional authority expenses for projects co-funded by EU cohesion policy. “Regions and cities are on the front line in delivering new jobs. They must be supported by the EU budget and involved in shaping the upcoming EUR 300 billion EU growth plan,” stressed Mr Lebrun.

Welcomed by Michel Lebrun, President of the Committee of the Regions and Iskra Mihaylova, Chair of the European Parliament’s REGI committee, some 900 people attended the opening session of the OPEN DAYS 2014, with key speeches delivered by Ramón Luis Valcárcel Siso, Vice-President of the European Parliament,

Johannes Hahn, European Commissioner for Regional Policy, José Ángel Gurría, SecretaryGeneral of the OECD, and Catiuscia Marini, First Vice-President of the Committee of the Regions, and a video message from José Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission.

During the opening session, discussions focused on the new evidence on regional and urban development provided in the European Commission’s sixth Cohesion Report and the OECD’s 2014 Regional Outlook (including information on the impact of the crisis on regions, the state of sub–national finances and government reforms), and Regional Well-Being reports, presented by the OECD Secretary-General, José Ángel Gurría.

18

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

Iskra Mihaylova, Chair of the European Parliament’s REGI committee and Michel Lebrun, President of the Committee of the Regions. The Committee of the Regions’ Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy (COTER) met with the European Parliament’s Committee on Regional Development (REGI) to discuss problems and opportunities emerging from the implementation of the reform of EU regional policy adopted last year. Complex rules, persistent lack of urban focus and delays in launching 2014-2020 programmes were among the critical issues raised by local and regional leaders.

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

Marek Wozniak, Chair of the COTER commission, Gordon Keymer, President of the ECR Group, Bas Verkerk, President of the ALDE Group, Ramón Luis Valcárcel Siso, VicePresident of the European Parliament, José Ángel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, Karl-

Marek Wozniak, Chair of the COTER commission opening the joint REGI-COTER meeting. The delivery of cohesion policy reform is giving rise to mixed reactions among regional and local leaders. “We are now in the ‘hot period’ when the process of negotiating partnership agreements and operational programmes is coming to an end,” said COTER Chair and Marshal of the Wielkopolska Region, Marek Wozniak who stressed that “The time has come to ask questions, such as how the new instruments will be implemented in the Member States.”

Heinz Lambertz, President of the PES Group, Michel Lebrun, President of the Committee of the Regions, Uno Silberg, President of the EA Group, Catiuscia Marini, First Vice-President of the Committee of the Regions and Johannes Hahn, European Commissioner for Regional Policy.

The Mayor of Lisbon, António Costa expressed his frustration over the fact that “the European Commission’s official statements do not match the reality in the Member States”. According to Mr Costa, “the municipalities were not adequately involved in shaping Portugal’s partnership agreement and now, out of the Lisbon programme’s EUR 800 million, only 10% are accessible to municipalities. This totally contradicts the principles of subsidiarity and multilevel governance”.

During the joint REGI-COTER meeting, the Chairman of the municipality of Gdynia, Stanislaw Szwabski, Committee of the Regions rapporteur for the EU Code of Conduct on Partnership, called for the partnership principle to be implemented fully: “The Code will guarantee greater transparency and local ownership, thereby ensuring a better response to people’s most pressing needs”.

The artistic performance during the official reception in the “Henri Leboeuf ” concert hall at Bozar.

Official reception at Bozar.

Michel Lebrun, President of the Committee of the Regions met Volodymyr Hroysman, Ukraine’s Deputy Prime Minister for Regional Development, to discuss setting up a task force on decentralisation reform in Ukraine. “The Ukrainian government has set an ambitious agenda for reforming local self-governance and the territorial reorganisation of power. The Committee of the Regions will strongly support this process,” said Michel Lebrun.

REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

19

OPEN DAYS 2014

On 9 October, Michel Lebrun presented the Committee of the Regions’ views at the Covenant of Mayors’ high-level meeting on energy security.

One of many events that accompanied the OPEN DAYS 2014 was the local market at Place Jean Rey in Brussels.

108 workshops, debates and networking activities were organised around three thematic priorities: connecting regional strategies, building capacity and territorial cooperation.

Brief Guide to the OPEN DAYS What is it?

The OPEN DAYS is an annual Brussels-based four-day event during which officials from regional and city administrations, as well as experts and academics, can exchange good practices and know-how in the field of regional and urban development. It is also an acknowledged platform for political communication on the development of EU cohesion policy, raising awareness among decision-makers about the fact that regions and cities matter in EU policy-making. The OPEN DAYS is the biggest European public event of its kind.

What actually happens?

At the beginning of October, some 6 000 participants and 600 speakers from all over Europe and beyond will gather together in Brussels for a programme of around 100 workshops, debates, exhibitions and networking events on regional and local development. The organisers adapt the programme every year to the specific context of the EU agenda. Participation in the OPEN DAYS is free of charge.

Regional and Urban Policy (DG REGIO). Usually in January, they launch a call for partners for that year’s OPEN DAYS. Over 200 partners from all over Europe are selected, usually in the spring: regions and cities, mainly grouped into thematic consortia (“regional partnerships”), companies, financial institutions, international associations or academic organisations. Partners have to organise seminars of common interest, often in the context of implementing European Structural and Investment Funds and other EU programmes.

What is the OPEN DAYS University and Master Class?

This refers to a set of workshops organised by DG REGIO, the CoR and the Regional Studies Association. The OPEN DAYS University raises awareness and facilitates exchanges between academics and regional and local representatives on research results in the field of regional and urban development and EU cohesion policy. Since 2013, a Master Class for PhD students has also been organised.

an estimated 200 000 participants and about 2 000 politicians and experts involved as speakers.

What is the impact of the OPEN DAYS? The impact of the OPEN DAYS has been systematically evaluated since the event first began.

Participants have highlighted the usefulness of information from the EU institutions and networking with colleagues from other countries as being relevant to their professional management of EU funds. The importance of the event is also demonstrated by its significant media impact. For years now, up to 300 print, radio, TV and online media journalists from all over Europe have come to Brussels to cover the event.

Who attends the OPEN DAYS?

Who attends the OPEN DAYS? What does the name “OPEN DAYS” stand for?

Back in 2003, the Committee of the Regions, the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives, invited Brussels-based local and regional representations to the European Union to open their doors to visitors simultaneously, as part of a joint “Open Days” concept. Over the years, the initiative has developed into a key annual event involving the European Commission and other stakeholders.

Who are the organisers?

The OPEN DAYS event is jointly organised by the EU Committee of the Regions (CoR) and the European Commission’s Directorate-General for

20

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

The audience is specifically interested in regional and urban policy, and so it mostly comprises officials at local, regional, national and EU level.

Data from the 2013 online survey show, that the typical participant is from a regional or local administration (52%), new to the event (45%) and is travelling to Brussels specifically for the event (82%).

How does the OPEN DAYS event reach out to the local level?

Between September and November, each of the 200 regions and cities organises one local event under the slogan “Europe in my region/city”.

Together with other partners, over 350 local events are held in more than 30 countries each year, with

51,82%

Regional or local administration

7,73%

National administration

4,55%

EU institutions

5,68%

Enterprises/Banks

4,55%

Civil Society Organisation

12,27%

Academic/research institute

7,73%

Consulat

5,67%

Other

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

RAPPORTEURS HAVE THEIR SAY

I

n this column, members of the Committee of the Regions explain what motivates them to take on the role of as a rapporteur. The following op-eds cover a diverse range of topics from Promoting quality of public spending to Removal of chemical waste dumped at sea.

Regions and cities need fresh public investment Catiuscia Marini (IT/PES), President of the Umbria region

“

There is a growing consensus that a re-launch of public investment is needed in order to trigger sustainable private investment, and thereby growth, but apart from the magic figure of EUR 300 billion floating in the air, there is nothing definite for the time being”, stressed Catiuscia Marini, president of Italy’s Umbria region and Committee of the Regions rapporteur for the opinion on “Promoting quality of public spending”.

“We urgently need to know whether this will be fresh money from both private and public sources, and how regions and cities will be involved in the process of planning and implementing the support measures. Regions and cities need fresh public investment of high quality and relevant to their needs. We sincerely hope that we will not see any repetition of what happened with the EUR 120 billion plan for growth, which was supposed to accompany the fiscal compact and which ultimately came to nothing,” said Ms Marini.

Considering that the issue is not just about setting figures, the rapporteur Ms Marini sets out a series

of specific proposals in her draft opinion aimed at more consideration being given in the medium- and long-term to the quality of public investment, including: · requesting a European Commission communication on how it intends to apply the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact in a more flexible way in order to promote the public investment needed to boost economic growth; · excluding national co-funding of EU-supported investment from expenditure accounted for in the Stability and Growth Pact; · requesting the European Commission to present a White Paper setting out an EU-level typology for quality of public investment in the accounts of public expenditure based on its long-term effects; · revising the methodology for calculating the “structural deficit” in order to take account of

the structural differences of public expenditure in the different Member States; · including a chapter on the quality of public investment, including at sub-national level, in every annual report on economic and monetary union (EMU) public finances.

The rapporteur insists that the debate should not become polemic: “It is not about public investment versus austerity”. Ms Marini also points to the IMF’s latest World Economic Outlook, which stresses the “strong case for increasing public investment for economies with clearly identified infrastructure needs and efficient public investment processes and where there is economic slack and monetary accommodation (…) Moreover, evidence from advanced economies suggests that an increase in public investment that is debt financed would have larger output effects than an increase that is budget neutral, with both options delivering similar declines in the debt-to-GDP ratio”. Discussion and adoption of the draft opinion is on the agenda of December’s plenary session.

Cohesion policy has proven its worth Nicola Zingaretti (IT/PES), President of the Lazio region

“

Cohesion policy has proven its worth in supporting investment, even during the most turbulent times of the crisis. We now need to boost its impact in terms of jobs, service quality and entrepreneurial innovation”. This was the message conveyed by the president of the Lazio region, Nicola Zingaretti to his colleagues in the Commit-

tee of the Regions’ Commission for Territorial Cohesion Policy (COTER) during the presentation of his draft opinion on the European Commission’s Sixth report on cohesion. Mr Zingaretti pointed out that “Excluding national and regional co-financing from the Stability Pact, striking a better balance between concentrating funds and specific

local needs, and stepping up cooperation between Brussels, governments and regions are key to making up for delays and transforming the new funds into real opportunities for Europeans.”

The COTER commission adopted the draft opinion drawn up by Mr Zingaretti, in which, based REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

21

RAPPORTEURS HAVE THEIR SAY

on the Commission’s report on the impact of the 2007-2013 programmes, the CoR proposes a package of measures to make the Structural Funds more effective. The objective is to ensure that the 2014-2020 programming helps to promote and consolidate economic recovery across Europe, reducing the development disparities which – after over a decade of convergence – are again on the rise owing to the recession.

“The new cohesion policy is being rolled out against a backdrop of trouble and strife in the EU, where disparities are increasing and public investment dropping. We must ensure that it is up to the challenge!” said the rapporteur. The draft opinion sets out a number of priorities, including: removing national and regional co-financing from national debt calculations for the purposes of the Stability Pact; activating new financial instruments which factor in the impact of the Structural Funds and in particular creating a European Bank credit line for investments which targets regional development; rethinking current rules which make Structural Fund allocation conditional on compliance with the Member States’ fiscal consolidation

commitments. The rapporteur points out that this condition, which is based solely on financial data with no allowance made for social, territorial or environmental indicators, could become a major barrier to the implementation of investment plans co-financed by cohesion policy.

“The new cohesion policy is being rolled out against a backdrop of trouble and strife in the EU, where disparities are increasing and public investment dropping. We must ensure that it is up to the challenge! “ Europe’s regions and cities are also calling for the procedures for accessing the funds to be made simpler and for something to be done to tackle the inconsistency between the requirement to tailor operational programmes to specific local needs and

the stipulation, brought in by the new regulations, that funds be concentrated on a limited number of thematic objectives. These objectives should be brought back to the table for further discussion and decided on in cooperation with the regions, with due account for their real-life situations.

Mr Zingaretti’s draft opinion calls for the Commission and the regions to work together more effectively and asks the executive to analyse and ensure the timely roll-out of technical support schemes to help the regions identify investment objectives more accurately, follow up on their results and improve overall management. Stronger support is also needed for the implementation of financial engineering mechanisms targeting local and regional authorities and for the strategic use of public procurement which should always promote innovative solutions. As regards cohesion policy governance, the draft opinion calls for the creation of a Cohesion Policy Council which would deal specifically with the Structural Funds and regional policies.

EU strategy for the Alpine region Herwig Van Staa (AT/EPP), President of the Tirol Regional Assembly

I

n December 2013 the European Council instructed the European Commission, in cooperation with the Member States, to draw up an EU strategy for the Alpine region (EUSALP) by June 2015. The role of the regions in developing and implementing the strategy was significantly strengthened – they are to work as equal partners with the Commission and the Member States on a specific action plan to implement the EUSALP. In addition to five EU Member States (Germany, France, Italy, Austria and Slovenia), the EUSALP comprises two non-EU countries, which are, however, members of the Council of Europe (Switzerland and Liechtenstein). The priority themes of the EUSALP were summarised in the form of three pillars: “competitiveness and innovation”, “transport, networks and access to services”, and “energy, natural and cultural resources”.

Of crucial importance is that the regional and local level has been given a say in the EUSALP’s gov-

22

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

ernance, in line with the principle of multi-level governance. An equal dialogue should take place between the mountainous area in the heart of the Alpine region and the surrounding areas with their major cities, ensuring a balance is struck between the interests of both.

“An equal dialogue should take place between the mountainous area in the heart of the Alpine region and the surrounding areas with their major cities, ensuring a balance is struck between the interests of both.”

The presidency of the EUSALP’s governing policy body is to rotate according to agreed principles, offering the countries and regions represented there

equal opportunity to exert influence. In order to combine the rotating presidency with continuity of public profile for the EUSALP, a special envoy will have to be given responsibility for liaising with the European institutions and leading implementation of the EUSALP action plan.

In the CoR we were able to set up an interregional group for the Alpine macroregion. I was appointed CoR rapporteur for the EUSALP, and my opinion on the topic was adopted by a large majority of the COTER commission back in October. The EUSALP will be successful if it manages to provide the public with tangible results and added value by way of specific projects and by managing implementation in a pragmatic and practical way.

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

European film in the digital era Jean-François Istasse (BE/PES), Member of the Parliament of the French Community

his draft opinion supports the Commission’s new strategy for European film, with a view in particular to boosting the competitiveness of this high-growth sector. Taking into account, I would add, demand from both within and outside Europe. Promoting the cultural and creative sectors fosters growth and jobs in the EU.

T

I would even say that the Commission should go beyond the publication of a mere communication.

In addition, the digital era provides new opportunities that must be seized at European level (interconnections between different European regions, new publics, new services, greater visibility, interregional cooperation, etc.).

Local and regional authorities play a key role in promoting culture, raising the profile of cultural heritage, encouraging artistic innovation and preserving cultural diversity.

The Commission has abandoned the idea of prohibiting all service provision restrictions on the origin of goods and services. A compromise has been found for territorialisation conditions, which should not in the main be revisited. Nevertheless, vigilance should be maintained until the final con-

clusions of negotiations on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership are known.

Furthermore, it is necessary to be very alert to new players entering the common market or to existing players who are adapting. It is equally necessary to adapt the rules for contributing to the funding of local and regional content. We want healthy competition between national operators and operators from outside the EU that have set up business in Europe. We also want to boost financing for alternative content that guarantees cultural diversity.

Above all, a debate must take place involving all stakeholders.

Multimodal transport, journey planning and ticketing Petr Osvald (CZ/PES), Member of Plzeň City Council

W

e all know from experience how hard it is to find out about timetables and fares for public transport. More often than not, each national operator (the national rail company, for example) only provides information about its own services, with just a vague idea about connections with the neighbouring national operator.

Alternatively, you might get comprehensive information but only at regional level. Generally speaking, however, there is nothing you can consult as a traveller to find out how to get from point A in the EU to point B or that would offer you alternative forms (“modes”) of transport and the best ways to combine them. And this is without even mentioning ticketing: being able to buy just one ticket for your entire journey across the EU. The reality is it is usually impossible to buy tickets of a foreign operator from your own country.

The fact that Europe does not have a system of this kind and the foundations have not even been laid is strange, to say the least, especially at a time when the EU is investing enormous sums in creating transport corridors and encouraging people to

choose public over private transport. Let’s be honest: if we really want people to use public more than private transport, cutting a 100km train journey by 10 minutes matters far less than making sure travellers know there is a train in the first place, that a private bus company will get you to it and that when you arrive at your destination at midnight a tram from the station will drop you off outside your hotel. And – an important point – that this journey will cost less or the same as going by car.

The fact that no centralised system exists for the EU – or, indeed, nationally in most Member States – is as if we knew there was a great play on somewhere, but we could never find out what it was and when and where it was being performed. The lack of an information system or joined-up timetable systems covering all forms of transport is, in my opinion, a fundamental hindrance to the mobility of EU citizens at this time.

But why is the situation as it is? Let’s not pull our punches: smaller private transport companies refuse to disclose their timetables because they use gaps in the market and cheaper prices to compete

with the big operators, who are often national monopolies. For their part, these big players refuse to include information about other operators in their own information systems.

Giving travellers a complete picture It almost beggars belief that we are incapable – at a time when we are sinking enormous investment into subsidising public transport – of giving travellers a complete picture of what is available where and when, especially since this is a public service we are talking about. It is as if the water company would not say when you would have water in your tap. We we need to take as our starting point the fundamental freedoms of the EU, in this case freedom of movement for people. Because this does not simply mean we shall not put obstacles in the way of people moving from one Member State to another, it means we shall make this travel as easy as possible. For me this is the main point. The fact that greater use of public transport will cut CO2 emissions, cut congestion for road-users, and so on, is secondary.

REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

23

RAPPORTEURS HAVE THEIR SAY

Setting up an EU-wide information system is unrealistic in the short term at least. It would be quite enough for the moment if information were gathered nationally and connecting interfaces set up to bring it together. The only bodies that could lawfully gather all information on multimodal transport are the Member States, which could do so under EU legislation. Public transport providers should be required to give Member States information about their services. And before you take this the wrong way and start thinking this is all sounding too socialist: No, I do not think it should be

only States that can provide this information to the public. The State should assemble the information and pass it on impartially – most often, probably, to small creative companies that can turn it into a range of innovative applications.

But so far I’ve just been talking about “static” information that could be used via various applications as the basis for a Europe-wide transport system, but also public transport in the EU as such. With information about public transport in the state it is, it is nothing short of a miracle that people in

the EU use such transport to get to places they are not entirely familiar with and yet don’t think of it as an extreme sport. That’s an exaggeration of course – but not a big one. But if – albeit belatedly – we do set about creating an information system for multimodal transport, it should be today’s level of technology and knowledge we use, not yesterday’s. This is why, in addition to processing of “static” data (timetables), these systems should also include dynamic, real-time data provided by navigation systems, by Copernicus (formerly GMES) and by Galileo.

Pan-European strategy needed for informal and non-formal education Marek Olszewski (PL/EA), Mayor of Lubicz

A

lthough Europe has strong assets, many challenges have to be tackled in the field of education, in order to achieve the ambitious objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy. Over the last few years, the recognition of non-formal and informal learning has been the subject of several comparative EU-wide analyses that have allowed a better understanding of the extent to which the recognition of prior non-formal and informal learning has been implemented.

In this context as a Rapporteur on this issue I think it is necessary to show the importance of recognising and validating skills acquired through non-formal and informal learning in the context of

lifelong learning. The principle of lifelong learning currently forms the cornerstone of Europe’s policy for education and employment. There are many significant regional and national differences in recognition and validation procedures of non-formal and informal skills throughout the education systems. Some EU countries and regions are lagging behind the need for recognition of non-formal and informal education/learning. Also recognition and validation procedures of non-formally and informally acquired competences and skills when analysed in EU dimension shows more than 100 different definitions of these processes present at national and regional levels. This calls for more general framework.

In my opinion there is a strong need to create panEuropean strategy (in the form of guidelines and possible implementation scenarios) for establishment of common framework for recognition and validation of informal and non-formal education/ learning in order to facilitate creation of relevant national procedures. Given these trans-national aspects, trans-national cooperation structures (both public and private) must also be involved in developing validation procedures. It would be also necessary to set up common quality standards for the recognition procedures. It would also have great impact on flexibility and mobility as a mean of education.

CoR call for a Green Paper on Mobility Cllr Gordon Keymer (UK/ECR), Member of Tandridge District Council

C

llr Gordon Keymer (UK/ECR) is the rapporteur for the Committee of the Regions opinion on mobility in geographically and demographically challenged regions. The opinion that was unanimously adopted during the 6-8 October CoR Plenary session calls for a Green Paper on Mobility.

24

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

“We need a Green paper on mobility”, stated Cllr Keymer. Mobility challenges are a barrier to sustainable and inclusive growth. Our aim is that mobility issues in challenged regions are better recognised and addressed in the full range of the EU’s programmes, increasing access to mobility for all, encouraging new employment opportunities and reducing the risk of depopulation in remote areas.

“Our approach is of course realistic. The real op-

portunity here is for different EU initiatives to be more scalable and more adaptable to areas of all types, and to complement the focus on urban areas with initiatives which will be of value to other area types,” said Cllr Keymer.

The Committee of the Regions used the term ‘challenged regions’ in its opinion. “There has been no adequate definition elsewhere,” explained Cllr

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

Keymer. These regions include mountain regions, island regions, sparsely populated regions, border and outermost regions. “However I would not limit our definition. Many regions including rural economies across Europe would recognise both the constraints and the consequences of reduced mobility,” stated Cllr Keymer. The importance of challenged regions is enshrined in the EU Treaties. Articles 174 and 394 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union recognise the restraints faced by geographically and demographically challenged regions and note that “special attention” should be paid to them.

“In this new EU legislative mandate, the European Commission, Council and European Parliament will need to address this important challenge. Until now, the EU’s actions did not always reflect the EU Treaty commitment to grant ‘special attention’ to challenged regions,” said Cllr Keymer. “It is time to refresh and rebalance the EU’s transport policy, so that regions of all types and all sizes can benefit”. “While developing this Green Paper, particu-

lar attention must be paid to where non-legislative actions such as a strategy, action plan, recommendations, guidelines, or the sharing of best practice could add value to national and sub-national initiatives,” emphasized Cllr Keymer.

The Committee of the Regions opinion underlines that tighter public finances, depopulation and rising unemployment are hitting regions hard. Cllr Keymer noted that “every cent the EU spends on transport in the 2014-20 period must truly make it easier for people to move from one location to another.” Remote areas face mobility constraints, which create key challenges. Constraints include increased distances between settlements, and often significant distances to pan-EU corridors and the main transport nodes such highways, airports, and hub railway stations. Also, fewer inhabitants make it difficult to attain a critical mass of potential users to ensure the economic viability of regional airports or other transport systems. Furthermore, specific geographic challenges faced by remote regions which result in extra costs for infrastructure

such as providing tunnels in mountain areas. The challenges that mobility constraints create include a lack of sustainable mobility affecting the attractiveness of rural and remote areas. This applies both in terms of individuals wanting to locate in the area, and the inward investment potential of the local area as assessed by business. There is also a significantly increased risk of social exclusion, as vulnerable social groups suffer from reduced access to employment and other life-enhancing opportunities.

Furthermore, there are territorial cohesion impacts, which are associated with a lack of mobility in a given area. Cllr Keymer explained that “despite EU Treaty goals to build cohesion in all regions in the EU, we see that urban areas only are prioritised in national and EU policies. A holistic approach to balanced development, one which seeks to spread the benefits of urban growth more equitably, is urgently needed and should form a fundamental pillar of both the EU’s mobility policies and the EU’s regional development policies.”

Realising the potential of our seas and oceans for growth and jobs Adam Banaszak (PL/ECR), Member of the Kujawsko-Pomorskie Regional Assembly

A

dam Banaszak (PL/ECR), Member of the Kujawsko-Pomorskie Regional Assembly, is the Committee of the Regions rapporteur on “Innovation in the Blue Economy: realising the potential of our seas and oceans for growth and jobs.” Mr. Banaszak’s opinion addresses the role that innovation can play in unlocking the potential of our “blue” economy (our marine and maritime sectors) for sustainable growth and job creation.

“The blue economy plays a crucial role in securing sustainable growth and d jobs” noted Mr. Banaszak highlighting that it “represents roughly 5.4 million jobs and generates a gross added value of almost €500 billion a year.”

The opinion, supported by all NAT Commission members, makes 4 key recommendations. It recommends the development of clearly defined performance indicators for growth and innovation in the blue economy. It reiterates the previous call made by the CoR for the drawing up plans for the removal of military material leftovers and chemical waste dumped at sea. It also calls for the creation of a specific Knowledge and Innovation Community (KIC) for the Blue Economy. Furthermore, it calls for an enhanced policy framework for the inclusion

of the private sector. On the subject of performance indicators, the opinion underlines the need to monitor the implementation of innovation and growth in the blue economy on an ongoing basis. “Clearly defined performance indicators for growth and innovation in the “blue” economy would be helpful for our Member States and local and regional authorities”, underlined Mr Banaszak.

Removal of chemical waste The importance of the removal of military material leftovers and chemical waste dumped at sea is something the Committee of the Regions had previously underlined in its opinion on Blue Growth for which the rapporteur was again Mr. Banaszak.

Mr Banaszak’s current opinion reiterates this call.

Mr Banaszak emphasised that information about our seas and oceans should also be used to help cleanse and replenish our marine environment.

“Cleaning our seas from chemical waste and military leftovers will help ensure biological diversity and fertility. It must be done,” he stated. In terms of its call for a KIC for “blue” economy to be set up, the CoR rapporteur Mr. Banaszak underlines that “a KIC is an important tool that could be used to development of skills and the transfer of

ideas from marine research to the private sector.”

Mr. Banaszak also noted that “gaps in knowledge and data about the state of our seas and oceans, seabed resources, marine life and risks to habitats and ecosystems represent one of the key barriers to realising the full potential of our blue economy.

Knowledge and data will promote growth, through a better understanding of the resources it contains how these can be best used in a sustainable manner.”

KICs are the operational basis of the EU agency, European Institute of Innovation and Technology (EIT), based in Budapest, Hungary. Knowledge and Innovation Communities, carry out a whole range of activities, covering the entire innovation chain, including training and education programmes, reinforcing the journey from research to the market, innovation projects and business incubators. Since 2010, when initially three KICs were set up, around eight more have been established. “I hope that in 2015, we will see the establishment of a Knowledge and Innovation Communities on the blue economy”, said Mr Banaszak.

REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

25

RAPPORTEURS HAVE THEIR SAY

Role of the private sector On the role of the private sector, Mr Banaszak underlined that “working with the private sector is a essential”. The opinion calls for particular consideration should be given to the possibility of implementing institutionalised public-private partnerships in view of the potential creation of new jobs. “The private sector and SMEs are crucial for growth and jobs. For instance, Micro-businesses represent 90% of this sector and are capable of generating the desired level of innovation.”

Furthermore, Mr Banaszak underlined that an enhanced policy framework for the inclusion of private business in the blue economy is necessary.

“To ensure optimal synergy between the public sector and the needs of the private sector, businesses should have an important voice in identifying research needs as well as in formulating norms, standards and business-friendly solutions”, explained Mr. Banaszak.

has to play in generating sustainable growth and jobs. “Innovation is really key for increasing our competitiveness, which will then create jobs and growth” stated Mr. Banaszak. He added that “research, which gives businesses access to new, wider information about the state of our seas and oceans can make businesses more competitive and, accordingly, trigger growth in employment, particularly in structurally weak areas.”

Overall, the Committee of the Regions opinion underlines the important role that innovation

Antti Liikkanen, Member of Rovaniemi Town Council

The Little Match Girl and Saint Nicholas

Santa Claus in Rovaniemi, Lapland

W

e can read in the press that the United Nations’ goal of halving poverty has been achieved five years before its deadline.

At the same time relative poverty, alienation and loneliness, and chronic depression have increased in the developed countries. I have myself observed this through my own experience as a psychiatric doctor working in the north of Finland, in “Santa Claus’ home town”, Rovaniemi. This autumn, I had a day off between two conferences in Brussels, so I wandered off to see the famous triptych Het

26

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

Lam Gods, also known as the Adoration of the Mystic Lamb or The Lamb of God by Jan van Eyk in Gent. As I tried to find his work, I happened upon “Saint Nicholas’ home church”. Of course, I was more than happy to observe the differences, as well as the similarities, between charitable bishop Saint Nicholas and our own Santa Claus from Rovaniemi.

Writing as the northernmost politician in the European Union, it’s very easy for me to piece together

poverty, alienation, Saint Nicholas, Santa Claus and the poor match girl in Hans Christian Andersen’s sad Christmas story. As I write this on the morning of my 68th birthday, I have just arrived home from +27 °C Bologna, from the problems of climate change and recycling. Snow is falling outside my window and the thermometer shows it is -3 °C outside. The northern lights fill the night sky with their effervescent colour symphony. The ski tracks and slopes of the early winter are taking form next to my house. You don’t see many little match girls up north, but the idea of solidarity towards disadvantaged people by the EU and the UN has run into headwind in recent years. Instead of us pulling together, a self-seeking attitude has gained ground both in municipalities and in the EU, as it has grown globally too. But we cannot live, here in the Arctic north, in southern Italy, in Belgium or elsewhere without human warmth and solidarity.

The good will of Saint Nicholas and his heir, the Finnish Santa Claus of the Arctic Circle and Korvatunturi, is a precious cultural resource belonging to the common ethos of humankind. It will not be destroyed by the on-going crisis, but it is our responsibility to take it into account and, with the EU, the UN and other partners, to continue to cherish that ethos of all humane movements and philosophies: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

Nº 89 – NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2014

BRIEF NEWS AND EVENTS Economic Forum in Bratislava

Markku Markkula

In his capacity as the Committee of the Regions’ rapporteur on Industrial Policy, Markku Markkula (FIN/EPP) took part in the Economic Forum in Bratislava on 16-17 October. The Forum, opened by the President of Slovakia, Andrej Kiska, himself a former entrepreneur and philanthropist, was co-organised by the Martens Centre, the Tunega Foundation and the Institute for Modern Slovakia. Mr Markkula presented the Committee’s views during the panel on Innovation and Reform: Setting the Growth Agenda.

The point of departure for the panel was the question of what is hindering innovation in Europe.

Opinion was divided on whether financing for businesses is decisive in this context. It seems that the banking sector does not provide the right type of funding to support innovation. At the same time, the EU is increasingly funding innovation, research and development. As recently stressed

by Gary Shilling, the problem could also be the flow of money within the real economy, as virtually none of the normal multiplier effects have been visible since 2008. Usually, when the FED or the ECB buys securities and the proceeds end up in the reserve accounts of the banks in which the funds are deposited, each additional dollar or euro in reserves is lent and re-lent, ultimately resulting in USD 70 in the M2 money supply. Since August 2008, however, that multiplication effect has largely failed and resulted in only USD 1.3 in the M2 total. The velocity of money has also decreased within the Eurozone. The banking sector is repairing balance sheets and cushions, and there are considerable differences, excess of reserves, compared to what is required by the regulators. In the USA, the difference between total and required reserves is USD 2.7 trillion.

But there are also challenges elsewhere. First, there is not enough cultural acceptance of entrepreneurship in Europe. Failure is associated with guilt and shame: such a perception teaches young people to ‘play safe’. Failed entrepreneurs hardly ever get a second chance. In addition, education and training

do not encourage risk-taking. Second, regulations are overburdening business in Europe. This concerns both EU-level and national business regulations. There is a tendency, especially among socialist parties in Europe, to control entrepreneurship.

For example, starting a business in a garage and employing people would be banned in many countries. The upcoming European Commission’s investment plan was also discussed. It was stressed that the way in which this money is spent will send a signal as to where the EU is heading in the area of innovation. The panel concluded that Europe needs to talk about its ‘entrepreneur heroes’ and to publicise innovation success stories. Politicians should establish communication channels for new entrepreneurs. Finally, regions and cities can be real incubators of growth and innovation, as has been the case in Espoo, Finland.

2030 Climate and Energy Policy Framework

Annabelle Jaeger

On 24 October, President of the Committee, Michel Lebrun, said, “Despite the wide ranging positions on the climate and energy package to 2030, we welcome the fact that a compromise has been reached on 2030 Climate and Energy Policy Framework. In this sense, the European Union has taken the lead and set an example for the world to follow. Though not matching the ambition set out by the Committee of the Regions, the targets set offer Europe’s local and regional authorities a basis to build from and a platform to launch negotiations during the UN climate talks in Paris next year”.

President Lebrun further pointed out that the decision on greenhouse gas reduction and renewable energy is a step in the right direction. We should remember that the previous 2020 targets drove up the share of renewable energy in the EU by 4.5%: it is a sector that can boost competitiveness, create jobs and attract investment in our communities.

Europe’s local and regional authorities have continually shown far greater ambition and are now

ready to deliver and try to exceed the targets over the coming years.

In a recent opinion led by Annabelle Jaeger (FR/ PES), member of Provence-Alpes-Côte d’A zur Regional Council, the Committee called for the EU to set a “winning trio” of 2030 EU climate and energy targets. By 2030, it had hoped for a 50% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to 1990 levels; 40% share of renewable energies, based on national targets; and 40% reduction in primary energy consumption compared with 2005 achieved through efficiency gains, also based on national targets.

ARLEM discusses the challenges of migration in the Mediterranean

The role of local and regional authorities in managing migration was the main topic of debate during the Committee of the Regions’ Commission for Economic, Social and Territorial Affairs (ECOTER) of the Euro-Mediterranean Regional and Local Assembly (ARLEM). The meeting, held in Malaga, Spain, on 20 October 2014, also looked at developing a roadmap on implementing ARLEM’s report on cohesion policy for the Mediterranean region.

Hosted by the Mayor of Malaga, Francisco de la Torre Prados, local and regional representatives from both the Committee of the Regions and the Mediterranean met to discuss the challenge of managing the flow of migration to the east and the south of the Mediterranean. Co-chaired by Peter Bossman, Mayor Of Piran (Slovenia) and Lüftü Savaş, Mayor of Antakya Municipality (Turkey) – members of the ARLEM ECOTER Commission – the discussions were based on a report drafted by the Mayor of Lisbon, Antonio Costa (PT).

ARLEM members Joana Ortega i Alemany (ES), Vice President of the Catalan Government, Karim Bennour, President of the People’s Municipal Assembly of Algiers (Algeria), Louisa Mavrommáti, Deputy Mayor of Engómi, Cyprus and Lüftü REGIONS AND CITIES OF EUROPE

27

BRIEF NEWS AND EVENTS

Savaş presented best practices. The second part of the event was devoted to developing a roadmap for the implementation of the ECOTER’s 2013 report on a cohesion strategy for the Mediterranean.

Drafted by rapporteur Joana Ortega i Alemany and adopted earlier this year, the report called for the extension of the instruments of the European Cohesion Policy to the EU’s southern neighbours.

Professor Shlomo Hasson from the Shasha Centre for Strategic Studies at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and Professor Omar Yousef, Member of the Board of Directors of the International Peace and Cooperation Centre in Jerusalem, presented a cross-border cooperation project entitled “Between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River: Strategic Plan 2050”. The Commission for Economic, Social and Territorial Affairs (ECOTER) is one of two commissions of the Euro-Mediterranean Regional and Local Assembly (ARLEM), which aims to bring a territorial dimension to the Union for the Mediterranean. It focuses specifically on the issues of decentralisation, urban and territorial development, cultural cooperation, information society, migration and integration, trade and SMEs.

The EER 2016 edition was launched at the SME Assembly in Naples, Italy, on 1 October 2014 by the President of the Committee of the Regions, Michel Lebrun, who said: “Since we want to encourage regions to move further along the path out of the crisis, we decided not to focus the EER initiative on past achievements but instead to make the EER award future-oriented: we reward those regions that have a forward-looking vision to implement the principles of the SBA”. He added: “This forward-looking orientation means that the EER initiative is aimed not only at regions that are already performing well economically. It also targets regions that may still be less prosperous, but have an ambitious entrepreneurial vision and credible action plan to bring this vision into reality”.

The deadline for the submission of applications is 16 March 2015. Up to three territories will be awarded the EER label for the year 2016.

European Entrepreneurial Region Award Ramón Luis Valcárcel Siso, former President of the CoR, with the 2015 EER awardees

The European Entrepreneurial Region (EER) Award is an initiative of the Committee of the Regions promoting the implementation of the Small Business Act for Europe (SBA) at regional and local level. The EER scheme identifies and rewards EU territories with outstanding, future-oriented entrepreneurial visions, regardless of their size, wealth or specific competences. The territories with the most visible, credible, forward-looking and promising political strategies aimed at fostering entrepreneurship and supporting SMEs are granted the label “European Entrepreneurial Region” (EER) for a specific year. Fifteen EU territories have been awarded the EER label so far.

This year, Lisbon, Northern Ireland and the Community of Valencia were nominated as European Entrepreneurial Region of the year 2015 during an award ceremony held alongside the plenary session of the Committee of the Regions in Brussels on 25 June 2014.

28

News from the EU’s assembly of regional and local representatives

The EER label is open to all EU territories below the level of the Member State that are endowed with competences at a political level and able to implement an overall entrepreneurial vision. Within the EER scheme, “regions” are defined in the broadest sense, including communities, autonomous communities, departments, Länder and provinces. In order to be eligible, the applicant must have the necessary political competence to implement a comprehensive strategy aimed at mainstreaming some or all SBA principles.

Eligible candidates are invited to draft a political EER strategy in which they commit themselves to develop their entrepreneurial potential through sustainable and credible actions. Against the backdrop of implementing the SBA principles, regions are asked to set measurable targets within the Europe 2020 horizon. Consultation of and cooperation with a broad range of stakeholders is an essential precondition to develop a lasting and beneficial overall entrepreneurial culture within a region, which should potentially create positive spill-over effects across the EU as a whole. Applicants must demonstrate a real political commitment to supporting SMEs and strengthening entrepreneurship through a strategy officially endorsed by the regional assembly, the government of the region or other authorised political bodies. More Information: eer-cdr@cor.europa.eu

JCC meeting in Montenegro

Local and regional leaders from the EU and Montenegro have declared their commitment to continuing to drive forward reform as part of the ongoing accession negotiations. Despite the European Commission suggesting that there would be no further countries joining the EU over the next five years, the leaders – who make up the Joint Consultative Committee (JCC) – hailed the progress of reform and called for further funds to be invested locally to further stimulate change.

The JCC gathered local and regional authority leaders from the EU’s Committee of the Regions (CoR) and Montenegro as part of the preparations for the country’s EU accession. The JCC, which held its fourth meeting in Kotor on Monday, debated local-government, agriculture and rural development and services of general economic interest (i.e. services requiring public authority delivery) reform in Montenegro. Participants were welcomed by Aleksandar Bogdanović, mayor of the Old Royal Capital Cetinje and the new co-chair of the JCC. Stanisław Szwabski (PL/EA), chairman of Gdynia City Council and the CoR co-chair of the JCC, emphasised that, “The political guidelines for the new European Commission indicate that no enlargement will take place in the next five years. This does not mean, however, that our preparation efforts should be reduced – on the contrary, we must continue to support reform and keep up motivation in order to be ready on time. We also need to make sure that the Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA) funds can be used in the best possible way in Montenegro to make progress in the priority areas and to benefit the local level”.

This was followed by statements by Tamara Srzentić, director at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and European Integration, André Lys, head of the Cooperation Section at the Delegation of the European Union to Montenegro, and Franz Schausberger (AT/EPP), who has been appointed rapporteur for the CoR opinion “Enlargement strategy and main challenges 2014-2015”. During the first part of the meeting the JCC members also discussed the Action Plan for the Self-Government Reform in Montenegro presented by Jadranka Vojinović, State Secretary of the Ministry of the Interior of Montenegro. The plan aims to develop

task of monitoring compliance with the principle of Subsidiarity. The Committee of the Regions has the power to take action against an infringement of subsidiarity through the Court of the Justice of the EU. The Court of Justice of the European Union has jurisdiction in actions on grounds of infringement of the principle of subsidiarity by a legislative act.

and streamline the local self-government system in Montenegro. The Committee welcomed the efforts by Montenegro in delivering state and local self-government building and the progress made in the accession negotiations.

Agriculture and rural development, as well as services of general economic interest, were also discussed. Despite progress on agriculture and rural development policy, alignment with EU legislation in this area is still at a relatively early stage. Similarly the latest European Commission report notes that Montenegro needed further legislative reform and to redefine its scope in the area of services of general economic interest – such as energy, communication and transport infrastructure – if it was to meet EU rules. Nevertheless, the Commission report indicates that Montenegro has made considerable progress in fulfilling its EU membership obligations. The JCC aims to follow the enlargement process and the progress of the accession negotiations through debates in relation to key thematic priorities in the cities and regions of the EU and of Montenegro. It is composed of eight CoR members and an equal number of local representatives from the partner country. The next JCC meeting is scheduled to take place in Brussels in the first semester of 2015.

ECR Group Bureau in London The Bureau of the European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR Group) in the Committee of the Regions of the European Union, held a seminar in London on 4 November 2014. In light of the approaching new CoR mandate, the seminar looked at the new 2014-2019 EU legislative period and addressed how local and regional authorities can help deliver better EU laws.

Among the participants were Geoffrey-Clifton Brown MP, Vice-President of the Alliance of European Conservatives and Reformists and Chair-

Cllr Gordon Keymer CBE, ECR Group President and Leader of Tandridge District Council with ECR members.

EA Primary School Art Competition

man of the Conservative Party’s International Office, Cllr Roger Evans, Chairman of the London Assembly and Pawel Swidlicki from Open Europe.

The points raised on what would need to be prioritised for the new legislative period, included the need to increase the EUs competitiveness through cutting red tape, completing the single market and decentralising powers. The need to move away from a “one size fits all” approach in the EU and the need to have a more flexible approach that would enable local solutions to be found to local problems was underlined. The seminar discussion also touched on the need to curb corruption and the misuse of EU funds as well as the need to address transportation challenges and the EUs immigration challenge.

Better EU governance and the CoRs role in delivering this was a key theme in the seminar. “Local authorities have a key role to play in the EU decision-making process. We provide consultation to the legislating bodies and act as the guardians of the principle of subsidiarity. Subsidiarity is the principle that ensures decisions are taken at the appropriate level of governance. It is the tool to ensure that Brussels steps in only when necessary,” stated Cllr Gordon Keymer CBE, ECR Group President and Leader of Tandridge District Council. Following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the Committee of the Regions was given the specialised

The European Alliance group has launched its highly acclaimed Primary Schools Art Competition aimed at primary school students between the age of 6 and 12. The topic for this year is ‘My Region, My Future, allowing students to depict through art the future of cities, towns, schools, environment, parks, Europe, etc. This year’s competition will see the participation of 16 primary schools from 9 Member States across the European Union.

Winning entries will be exhibited in the Committee of the Regions at the beginning of December after which the artworks will be transformed into postcards for the students and schools to send to their friends. More information available on: www.ea.cor.europa.eu

PES Group 2014 photo competition

Photo by Gediminas Tamulynas, Lithuania, Winner of the 1st Prize

The seventh edition of the PES Group photo competition for Europeans under the title “Europe for jobs, jobs for Europe” will conclude with the award ceremony for the winning photos on 3 December, during the PES Group’s meeting ahead of the Committee’s plenary session. Participants were asked to capture with their camera their jobreality or job-dreams in Europe. The competition attracted wide interest amongst European amateur photographers. The jury, presided by PES Group member Elisabeth Vitouch, selected three photos.

A fourth photo won the prize of the public, who selected the photo via the Group’s Facebook page.

The winners will be awarded a trip to Brussels and photographic equipment.

Want to learn more about Europe? Keep informed, join the conversation: join us on Facebook and Twitter to discover all the latest news from Europe’s cities and regions.

www.facebook.com/committee.of.the.regions @EU_CoR

Would you like to receive R QG-AA-14-089-EN-C

Regions & Cities of Europe is published by the Committee of the Regions, the EU institution representing local and regional authorities.

Subscription is free of charge. To subscribe, please send your name and address, by e-mail to regionsandcities@cor.europa.eu or by post to the following address: Committee of the Regions Press Department — Subscription to Regions & Cities of Europe Rue Belliard/Belliardstraat 99–101 1040 Bruxelles/Brussel BELGIQUE/BELGIË