In adopting a report from Konstantinos HATZIDAKIS (EPP-ED, GR), Parliament supports the new approach to cohesion policy the EU for the period 2007-2013. (Please refer to the previous document).

In addition to the document drafted by the committee responsible, it should be noted that, for rural areas, Parliament supports the Commission's intention to create a single fund for rural developments, which will henceforth form the second pillar of the CAP. Nevertheless, they regret that the Commission has not confirmed an increase in the second pillar in the future EU budget, but plans instead to freeze rural development spending at the 2006 level, which would lead to a constant fall in rural development appropriations given that there will be 25 or 27 Member States.

Regarding fisheries, MEPs say support instruments should support the sustainable development of fishing activities and an improvement of the living and working conditions of fishermen.

Parliament urges that the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund should retain their structure based on expenditure targets; considers that the N+2 rule for the automatic de-commitment of appropriations that have not been implemented should be retained, since it has proved its effectiveness in improving the implementation of funds over the current programming period.

Equally, it agrees with the overall apportionment of funds to the three objectives. Moreover, it welcomes the fact that the absorption limit of 4% of national GDP for allocation of funds to the Member States has been retained, and that amounts covered by rural development and fisheries instruments are also to be taken into account in this connection.

On the issue of the coordination with other policies and notably the future of State aids, Parliament underlines the necessity for the Commission to come forward with proposals for the future of State aids based on Article 87(3)(a) of the Treaty and to reflect on how territorial differentiation might be incorporated into the rules through the use of appropriate indicators. It also considers it absolutely essential to maintain territorial differentiation in competition state aid policy in order to pursue a territorial cohesion objective. It calls on the Commission to ensure that the relocation of businesses is not subsidised by European regional policy.

Satisfied with the Commission's aim to simplify regional policy, Parliament urges the Commission to take account of the "user viewpoint", i.e. to make it easier for businesses, universities and national organisations to participate in projects without their activities being unnecessarily hampered by bureaucracy, payment reporting requirements etc.

Parliament declares itself in favour of the proposals to enhance partnership and cooperation between the local, regional, national and EU spheres of government and to encourage Member States to utilise the possibility of concluding tripartite agreements where appropriate. It asks the Commission to develop harmonised and binding rules and criteria for partnership association and development in the framework of the 2007-2013 Structural Funds regulations, at the same time ensuring efficient partnership through funding the costs of their participation.

Parliament asks the Commission to draw up for the next programming period procedures for verifying additionality that are more workable, that are integrated into the programming, monitoring and evaluation frameworks and that are suitable for use with the budgetary and statistical information available. Furthermore, it asks the Commission to develop specific measures such as sanctions in order to ensure compliance with this principle.

Lastly, it should be noted that the Parliament rejected by 242 votes against, 199 for and 11 abstentions the paragraph in the resolution which initially asked that the Parliament be treated on equal footing with the Council on the adoption of the Commission's programme on cohesion.

In adopting a report from Konstantinos HATZIDAKIS (EPP-ED, GR), Parliament supports the new approach to cohesion policy the EU for the period 2007-2013. (Please refer to the previous document).

In addition to the document drafted by the committee responsible, it should be noted that, for rural areas, Parliament supports the Commission's intention to create a single fund for rural developments, which will henceforth form the second pillar of the CAP. Nevertheless, they regret that the Commission has not confirmed an increase in the second pillar in the future EU budget, but plans instead to freeze rural development spending at the 2006 level, which would lead to a constant fall in rural development appropriations given that there will be 25 or 27 Member States.

Regarding fisheries, MEPs say support instruments should support the sustainable development of fishing activities and an improvement of the living and working conditions of fishermen.

Parliament urges that the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund should retain their structure based on expenditure targets; considers that the N+2 rule for the automatic de-commitment of appropriations that have not been implemented should be retained, since it has proved its effectiveness in improving the implementation of funds over the current programming period.

Equally, it agrees with the overall apportionment of funds to the three objectives. Moreover, it welcomes the fact that the absorption limit of 4% of national GDP for allocation of funds to the Member States has been retained, and that amounts covered by rural development and fisheries instruments are also to be taken into account in this connection.

On the issue of the coordination with other policies and notably the future of State aids, Parliament underlines the necessity for the Commission to come forward with proposals for the future of State aids based on Article 87(3)(a) of the Treaty and to reflect on how territorial differentiation might be incorporated into the rules through the use of appropriate indicators. It also considers it absolutely essential to maintain territorial differentiation in competition state aid policy in order to pursue a territorial cohesion objective. It calls on the Commission to ensure that the relocation of businesses is not subsidised by European regional policy.

Satisfied with the Commission's aim to simplify regional policy, Parliament urges the Commission to take account of the "user viewpoint", i.e. to make it easier for businesses, universities and national organisations to participate in projects without their activities being unnecessarily hampered by bureaucracy, payment reporting requirements etc.

Parliament declares itself in favour of the proposals to enhance partnership and cooperation between the local, regional, national and EU spheres of government and to encourage Member States to utilise the possibility of concluding tripartite agreements where appropriate. It asks the Commission to develop harmonised and binding rules and criteria for partnership association and development in the framework of the 2007-2013 Structural Funds regulations, at the same time ensuring efficient partnership through funding the costs of their participation.

Parliament asks the Commission to draw up for the next programming period procedures for verifying additionality that are more workable, that are integrated into the programming, monitoring and evaluation frameworks and that are suitable for use with the budgetary and statistical information available. Furthermore, it asks the Commission to develop specific measures such as sanctions in order to ensure compliance with this principle.

Lastly, it should be noted that the Parliament rejected by 242 votes against, 199 for and 11 abstentions the paragraph in the resolution which initially asked that the Parliament be treated on equal footing with the Council on the adoption of the Commission's programme on cohesion.