Activites

• 1997/05/19 Final act published in Official Journal
• 1997/04/24 Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
  • T4-0212/1997 summary

    In adopting the report by Mrs Arlene McCARTHY (PSE, UK) on development problems and structural interventions in the United Kingdom in the period 1994-1999, the European Parliament stresses the need for the British Government to carry out in-depth consultation and a comprehensive review of current procedures in the Department of the Environment before the implementation of projects receiving structural fund support. Noting the need to address problems associated with administrative and financial procedures, it calls on the Commission and UK Government to investigate administrative best practice and introduce improved procedures. Delays in making payments, particularly under the ESF, are considered to be unjustified and more efficient payment mechanisms should be introduced as a matter of urgency. It notes the problem of debt relating to late payments affecting small organizations and the voluntary sector and calls for the creation of advance global grants for the creation of Intermediary Funding Bodies (IFBs) to alleviate the problem. At the same time, it calls for greater flexibility in the use of the funds to avoid underspending. In addition, the funds should be simplified by introducing a clearer applications process and clear and more transparent project selection methods. The impact of Community initiatives should be examined so as to rationalize them and make the necessary adjustments. Parliament acknowledges the importance of partnerships for the effective functioning of the fund and calls for their nature and role to be better defined. It regrets the decline in the representation of local authorities in favour of quasi-autonomous non-governmental organizations and calls for their planning role to be strengthened. It calls on the Commission to take into consideration local partners' wishes in the transport sector and grant them aid on a sliding scale according to the value of their contribution. At the same time Parliament regrets: - the introduction of the 'Regional Challenge' competitive bidding system, - the decision of the UK Government not to participate in funding for the readaptation of workers to industrial change, - the lack of information for the public concerning structural fund aided projects, - the problems of continuity affecting ESF annual programmes and the lack of coherence between the different funds. It recommends the creation of separate funds operating on a regional basis and a review of ESF and ERDF administrative procedures in order to improve their complementarity. Efforts should also be made with regard to selection criteria so as to take better account of industrial change, GDP and the relationship between falling unemployment and non-sustainable employment. Transitional funding mechanisms should be created, together with measures to promote sustainable job creation for industrial regions. Priority should be given to sustainable development and environmental impact assessments should be made a condition for project approval in every case. While welcoming the efforts of the British Department of the Environment to review all current projects in this light, it regrets that this action is being taken at such a late stage. Finally, Parliament regrets the under-utilization of technical assistance funds and urges the government offices in the regions to consider setting up independent secretariats in the English regions.�

• 1997/04/23 Debate in Parliament
  • Debate in Parliament
• 1997/04/08 Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
  • A4-0126/1997
• 1996/01/31 Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
• 1994/07/29 Non-legislative basic document published
  • 31994D0636 summary

    OBJECTIVE: to approve the single programming document (SPD) for Community structural interventions in the Merseyside region (UK) (Objective 1 - 1994-99). CONTENT: the SPD includes the following: - the main development priorities for action to be taken in coherence with the economic and social policies of Merseyside: . action for industry (e.g. developing basic corporations, local enterprises, high-tech, cultural and media enterprises), . action for residents: integration, training, community development and improved quality of life; - the assistance to be provided under the Structural Funds, which has been set at ECU 816 million for the period from 1994 to 1999 (divided into equal annual instalments). This sum is divided between the Funds as follows: . ERDF : ECU 475 million . ESF : ECU 338 million . EAGGF-Guidance : ECU 3 million; - a number of provisions relating to: . procedures for monitoring and evaluating action taken, . the financial implementation of interventions, . rules for complying with Community policies, . procedures for granting financial assistance. These arrangements are described in the financial statement annexed to the programming document (annex not published in Official Journal).�

Documents

• Non-legislative basic document published: 31994D0636
• Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A4-0126/1997
• Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
• Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T4-0212/1997

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)