A3-0155/94

Resolution on the regional aspects of the European Economic Area and enlargement of the European Union

The European Parliament

- having regard to the motions for resolutions by:

(a)Mr H. F. Köhler and others on the regional implications of EC-EFTA negotiations on establishing a European Economic Areas (EEA) (B3-0690/91),

(b)Mr McCartin on regional development in the west of Ireland and the EFTA Fund (B3-1737/91),

(c)Mr Cushnahan on the allocation of the new funds created under the European Economic Area Agreement (B3-1754/91),

-having regard to the Treaty on European Union and the Agreement on the European Economic Area;

-having regard to applications for accession to the European Union from Austria, Sweden, Finland and Norway, submitted on 17 July 1989, 1 July 1991, 18 March 1992 and 25 November 1992 respectively and the expected enlargement of the European Union by 1995;

-having regard to the Commission's opinions on enlargement as well as some position papers on accession to the European Union;

-having regard to the amended regulations governing the Structural Funds covering the period 1994 to 1999;

-having regard to Rule 45 of its Rules of Procedure,

-having delegated the power of decision to the Committee on Regional Policy, Regional Planning and Relations with Regional and Local Authorities, pursuant to Rule 52 of its Rules of Procedure,

-having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Policy, Regional Planning and Relations with Regional and Local Authorities and the opinion of the Committee on External Economic Relations (A3-0155/94),

A.whereas cooperation of now twelve western European nation states within very few years has moved from a common internal market to a European Union; whereas this entity has experienced dramatic developments on its external borders due to economic and political changes in Central and Eastern Europe as well as a global economic recession;

B.whereas cooperation between member states of the EU and those of the European Free Trade Association, EFTA, was strengthened by the signing of the agreement on the European Economic Area, creating an internal market of 380 million people;

C.whereas the EU and Sweden, Austria, Finland and Norway, following applications for accession to the European Union, have reached agreement on accession negotiations, pending ratification and referenda in the applicant countries; whereas negotiations could lead to enlargement of the European Union by 1995;

1.Welcomes the fact that Austria, Finland, Sweden and Norway, all signatories to the EEA Agreement, applied for accession to the EU, recognising a mutual European identity and affinity, seeking a cooperation with the same rights of and obligations to the letter and spirit of the European Union;

2.Regrets that Switzerland, following the result of a referendum, opted out of becoming a signatory to the EEA Agreement; recalls that Switzerland's application on accession to the European Union of 26 May 1992 has not been withdrawn;

3.Recognises that for decades, cooperation has been intense between the Community and EFTA as well the four applicant countries for economic, geographical and historic reasons, and that it would be of benefit to all parties if strengthened by enlargement;

4.Points out that the four applicants constitute a very important group of countries for the EU and vice-versa as far as financial, economic and commercial relations are concerned, to which could be added further areas of cooperation within security policies at large, the environment, research and development and other policy areas such as health and social security, education and culture, and transport and tourism;

5.Notes that regional and structural policies were one of the main policy areas in the accession negotiations, in particular for the three Nordic applicant countries due to their specific characteristics when measured by traditional social/economic parameters as applied within the EU and confirmed in 1993 when adopting the amended regulations for the Structural Funds;

6.Underlines that all four applicant countries have expressed their agreement with the EU's structural policies and its main structural policy objective of supporting social and economic cohesion;

7.Recalls that the Union by an enlargement of all four applicant countries will see its surface enlarged by more than 50%, while its population will increase by only some 6%;

8.Underlines that regional policies and the concept of peripherality will take on a new meaning through enlargement, in particular by accession of three Nordic countries, adding new challenges to the functioning of the internal market due to increased competition, but also offering new possibilities for development if present obstructions for full cooperation disappear;

9.Notes that eligibility criteria for structural funding call for no special remarks concerning Objectives 2, 3, 4 and 5b, Community initiatives and assistance from the European Investment Bank for all four acceding countries; notes that these countries at present suffer from high unemployment and effects of restructuring traditional industries to an extent comparable to those of the present Member States of the European Union;

10.Recognises that the Nordic applicant states face specific regional problems due to vast and extremely sparsely populated areas with under 15 inhabitants per km2 (in cases down to 2 persons per km2) as compared to 150 per km2 in the EU; notes that all Nordic applicants pursue an active settlement policy in all territorial units, a policy considered essential for security reasons;

11.Notes that Burgenland in Austria will be recognised as an Objective 1 region on accession;

12.Notes the creation of a new Objective 6 of the Structural Funds where the regional eligibility criterion will be less than 8 inhabitants per km2 covering mainly Arctic regions in Norway, Sweden and Finland; structural aid under this criterion will cover 5%, 14% and 17% of the population in Sweden, Norway and Finland respectively;

13.Notes further that account will be taken of GDP per head, and eligible areas are in general of the administrative and statistical level of NUTS II, although adjacent regions have been considered for eligibility in the same way as they are for Objective 1;

14.Agrees that the present eligibility criteria of the EU would not reflect the actual needs of Arctic regions as they arise from negative regional parameters such as long distances for transport, extreme low population density, intense interregional emigration, high construction costs for housing and of infrastructure at large and particular harsh climatic conditions;

15.Supports the accession agreement to admit the Nordic applicant countries with a continuation of their selective regional policies, which for decades have been geared to an active settlement policy in view of sustainability of given areas;

16.Is of the opinion that regional policy as pursued in the applicant countries does not constitute a distortion of competition in case of accession as most assisted production can mainly be considered as a contribution to sustainability of the respective territories;

17.Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission.