A3-0264/94

Resolution on the Commission draft notice to the Member States laying down guidelines for operational programmes which Member States are invited to establish in the framework of a Community initiative concerning urban areas (URBAN) (COM(94)0061 - C3-0137/94)

The European Parliament,

-having regard to the Commission draft notice to the Member States (COM(94)0061 - C3-0137/94),

-having regard to Article 11 of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 2082/93 which is the legal basis for Community initiatives, in particular the provisions that the measures financed should be "of significant interest to the Community" and that, "for a limited part of the appropriations available" that the forms of assistance may cover areas outside those that are normally eligible ("flexibility"),

-having regard to the code of conduct on the implementation of structural policies by the Commission where it is stated that "the Commission will take Parliament's requests in to consideration whenever possible in order to take them in to account when deciding on each initiative",

-having regard to its resolution of 26 October 1990 on a concerted regional planning policy, which stressed the need for strategies to reverse the current trend towards urban concentration and the need to encourage balanced land management,

-having regard to its resolution of 28 October 1993 on the future of Community initiatives under the Structural Funds, in particular its call for an integrated urban development programme whose objective would be to stimulate local economic development,

-having regard to its resolution of 17 December 1993 on the problems of and prospects for conurbations,

-having regard to its decision in the course of the budgetary procedure for 1994 to create a budget line within the Community initiatives chapter entitled "Urban Policy",

-having regard to the Interinstitutional Agreement on budgetary discipline of 29 October 1993 and the financial perspective annexed thereto,

-having regard to its resolution of 28 October 1993 on the draft general budget of the European Communities for the 1994 financial year, section III - Commission, and in particular paragraph 8 thereof,

-having regard to the general budget for the European Union for the financial year 1994, in particular Article B2-140 and Chapter B0-40 thereof,

-having regard to the report of the Committee on Regional Policy, Regional Planning and Relations with Regional and Local Authorities and the opinions of the Committee on Budgets, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs and Industrial Policy, the Committee on Social Affairs, Employment and the Working Environment and the Committee on Women's Rights (A3-0264/94),

A.whereas Parliament, through its reports, its budgetary powers and its influence over the Commission, has played a decisive role in bringing this initiative in to being,

B.whereas the European Union's contribution to resolving urban problems must be limited for reasons of subsidiarity and lack of financial resources; whereas, nevertheless, this contribution should in future be increased so that a genuine Community policy for urban areas can be applied,

C.whereas the URBAN initiative should complement the policies in favour of cities already being carried out at Community, national, regional and city level,

D.whereas urban policy will only be effective if it is part of a genuine regional policy, conducted by the Union and the member states, designed to bring about a more balanced distribution of population and economic activity over the territory of the Union,

E.whereas measures should be taken to promote better cooperation between urban centres and their hinterland,

F.whereas in some cases cities have benefited from significant spending under the Structural Funds; whereas the Community support frameworks (CSFs) for the period 1994 - 1999 contain proposals for further expenditure,

G.whereas the Commission has proposed a total budget for URBAN of ECU 600 million of which some ECU 400 million would be spent in Objective 1 regions; whereas finance will be drawn from both the ERDF and the ESF,

H.whereas the Commission expects to finance a maximum of fifty projects for a period of four years,

I.whereas target areas are defined by the Commission as geographically identifiable neighbourhoods within densely populated areas, with a minimum population level, with a high level of unemployment, a decayed urban fabric, poor housing and lack of social amenities and, as a general rule, belonging to cities which form metropolitan areas within a specific regional and interregional framework,

J.whereas medium-sized cities with fewer than 100,000 inhabitants which serve as the urban centre for their region, and may account for more than a quarter of the population of their region, should also be eligible,

K.whereas the criteria applicable to areas targeted by the URBAN Initiative may, under exceptional circumstances, be met by cities which have significantly fewer than 100 000 inhabitants, but belong to the 'cultural heritage' of the European Union by virtue either of the key role they have played in the history of Europe or of their unique architectural and urban heritage,

L.whereas the range of eligible measures covers economic development, social integration and the environment,

M.whereas the Commission proposes that local and other authorities and the social partners should be involved in the preparation and implementation of operational programmes in the manner appropriate to each Member State;

N.whereas many urban and regional planning problems at national and European level arise through planning errors and the absence of a coherent strategy for urban development,

O.whereas factors such as the break-up of established communities, the excessive concentration of commercial development in city centres leading to loss of permanent residents to the periphery and the building of large housing projects whose design is not adapted to the needs of residents and the requirements of security, are the reason why it is so difficult to maintain a normal family life, the absence of which is the root of many urban problems,

General comments

1.Welcomes the decision to establish a Community initiative to combat urban problems and views it a modest but significant extension of the European Union's activities in favour of urban areas that can be further extended, as appropriate, in the future;

2.Demands that priorities be made for women's programmes under this initiative and calls upon the Commission to earmark resources for programmes, proposals and actions targeting women and to report regularly to the European Parliament in this regard;

The aims, financial envelope and geographical scope of the initiative

3.Considers it essential that the objectives of this initiative should be planned and implemented on the basis of available funding arrangements under the URBAN initiative and with the prospect of an increase so as to meet actual requirements;

4.Notes that the Commission has not stated explicitly whether the ECU 200 million available for cities outside Objective 1 should be limited to Objectives 2 and 5b; believes that a small degree of flexibility is appropriate as part of the funds should be used to encourage contacts between cities in the less prosperous regions and in the core regions; considers, however, that the geographical scope of the initiative should be widened to take into account the serious urban problems facing Objective 2 eligible areas and other industrial areas located outside Objective 1 eligible areas; considers that it is therefore absolutely essential that additional funding should be made available in the very short term;

5.Agrees with the definition of target areas; believes that unemployment as a criterion of selection should be applied flexibly, bearing in mind that in certain regions and Member States the unemployment indicators are influenced by peculiarities in the local conditions of employment and that the unemployment criteria differ from country to country so that a similar or identical situation is presented in a different light;

6.Considers it inadequate to limit to 50 the number of projects eligible for aid from the URBAN initiative, particularly as this is a new Community initiative and no experience has yet been acquired as regards the type of projects that will be submitted or the scale of the funding required;

7.Notes that the Commission will be advised by a panel of experts in the selection of projects; considers that this is a sensible approach as long as final decisions rest with the Commission for formal reasons and because the Commission is better placed to take a broad view of Community policy and spending and to favour the emergence of integrated projects;

8.Approves the concentration of aid on the poorest areas; suggests, however, that part of the aid could be used for projects designed to revitalize problem neighbourhoods that demonstrate with special clarity the advantages to a city of the renovation of the existing urban fabric;

Eligible measures

9.Notes that the choice of eligible measures has been inspired by measures whose value has been tested within Urban Pilot Programmes financed under Article 10 of the ERDF Regulation; urges the Commission, whenever practicable, to take account of the results of the many urban studies that it has financed in recent years, often at Parliament's request;

10.Notes the frequent use of the word "innovative" in the description of the measures; approves this emphasis where it refers, for example, to the combination of measures that will be used; believes, however, that it should not exclude programmes that contain tried and trusted instruments of urban regeneration;

11.Highlights the need, in view of ecological and other considerations, to promote the redevelopment of old inner-city industrial wasteland and contaminated land which should be used for a different purpose, such as housing;

12.Considers that the measures aimed at improving the social, health and safety facilities as regards the special needs of the handicapped should include the aspect of local urban social and health care;

Social aspects

13.Points out that the problems of urban deprivation are both social and economic which, unless combatted, create a vicious circle of continuing decline, disinvestment and dilapidation out of which local urban societies and economies find it very difficult to break;

14.Believes that greater emphasis should be put in the draft notice on sustainable employment development and the creation of high quality jobs given that urban areas suffer the highest rates of business failure; also suggests that in paragraph 17, first indent (Launching of new economic activities), mention should be made of the need for business development services and business growth strategies which are necessary for local enterprises to expand their operations and personnel;

15.Points out that areas of urban deprivation can often be isolated pockets within cities which are relatively prosperous; is of the opinion that local decentralized projects should be eligible for assistance under this Initiative;

16.Points out that it is quite likely that eligible urban areas will contain populations made up of significant numbers of ethnic minorities and that persistent overt and covert racial discrimination is a contributory factor in urban deprivation and should, therefore, be taken account of in projects selected for assistance by this Initiative;

17.Notes that the combined efforts of the ERDF and the ESF will be needed to finance this initiative; believes that the Commission must be more explicit as to the level of the financial contribution to be provided by each Fund, and in particular the ESF;

18.Insists on complementarity with projects financed by this initiative and operational programmes funded as part of CSFs and other relevant Community programmes, in particular the Poverty IV programme and LEONARDO; believes that evidence of such complementarity should be included in project applications and form an element in the Commission's selection criteria;

19.Urges the Commission to take full account of the specific needs of women and the family in the list of eligible measures particularly with regard to safety in urban areas and to the provision of services and infrastructure to make it easier for women to combine work and family life;

Exchange of experience and technical assistance

20.Approves the emphasis placed on exchanges of experience, transfer of "know-how" and the creation of networks between European cities; considers that cities outside eligible regions should participate in these networks; recommends moreover that cities outside the Union, especially in the applicant countries and Eastern Europe, should be allowed to participate in the networks created;

21.Notes, however, that networks do not ensure that cities take full account of best practice in urban policy and planning in their day-to-day decisions; urges the Commission to monitor the activities of the networks that it finances and in particular to examine how exchanges of experience can have greater practical influence on policy;

22.Believes that it would be valuable to arrange seminars to encourage exchange of experience between public officials concerned in the drawing-up and administration of urban programmes; underlines the importance of technical assistance to the success of the initiative;

Conditionality

23.Proposes that aid should be granted only where the beneficiary city has a coherent urban strategy based on best practice with regard to such matters as planning, zoning and transport policy; points out that if inappropriate planning policies are pursued aid will be spent merely on treating the symptoms of urban decay while the underlying causes remain untouched;

Attribution of aid

24.Notes that Member States are invited to present operational programmes but no provision is made for global grants using, for example, urban development corporations as intermediary bodies; urges that aid should be administered, whatever form it takes, by the beneficiary cities, urban communities or local authorities rather than the bureaucracy of the Member States so as to ensure the efficiency, transparency and additionality of the expenditure;

Loans from the EIB

25.Recalls that the EIB has some experience in financing urban projects and considers that it should be encouraged to complement the URBAN initiative through its lending;

Consultation and partnership

26.Believes that the citizens who will be affected by any urban programme financed under the Initiative should be consulted either directly or through their locally elected representatives; considers that many of the worst planning errors of the past could have been avoided if real consultation had taken place;

Reports

27.Asks the Commission to keep it regularly informed of the implementation of the initiative as its progresses, notify it of each of the projects adopted and provide it with a breakdown of the quantities earmarked for each objective;

28.Instructs its President to transmit this resolution to the Commission, Council, the Committee of the Regions and the governments of the Member States.