REPORT on Enlargement: policies, criteria and the EU’s strategic interests
3.10.2012 - (2012/2025(INI))
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Rapporteur: Maria Eleni Koppa
MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION
on Enlargement: policies, criteria and the EU’s strategic interests
The European Parliament,
– having regard to the Treaty on European Union (TEU), in particular its Articles 2, 21 and 49,
– having regard to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA II) (COM(2011)0838/4),
– having regard to the Presidency Conclusions of the Copenhagen European Council of 21-22 June 1993, of the Madrid European Council of 15-16 December 1995, of the Thessaloniki European Council of 19-20 June 2003 and of the Brussels European Council of 14-15 December 2006,
– having regard to the Council Conclusions of 5 December 2011 on Enlargement and the Stabilisation and Association Process,
– having regard to the renewed enlargement consensus adopted by the Council in 2006 and to the consolidated enlargement strategy implemented by the Commission thereafter,
– having regard to the Commission communication of 20 February 2008 on ‘Five years of an enlarged EU – Economic achievements and challenges’ (COM(2009)0079/3),
– having regard to its resolutions of 13 December 2006 on the Commission communication on the Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2006-2007, of 10 July 2008 on the Commission’s 2007 enlargement strategy paper, and of 26 November 2009 on the Commission’s 2009 enlargement strategy paper concerning the Western Balkan countries, Iceland and Turkey, as well as the Commission communications on the Enlargement Strategy of 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012,
– having regard to its previous resolutions on the countries of the Western Balkans, Iceland and Turkey,
– having regard to Rule 48 of its Rules of Procedure,
– having regard to the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the opinion of the Committee on Budgets (A7-0274/2012),
A. whereas, in accordance with Article 49 TEU, any European state which respects and remains committed to the promotion of the values of human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities, may apply to become a member of the Union; whereas these values are the foundation of the European Union itself and guide its action on the international scene, and must be respected and upheld by all Member States;
B. whereas enlargement has been part of the EU agenda since as early as the 1960s; whereas since the first enlargement in 1973, the EU has grown gradually, its membership rising from the six founding members to the current 27 (soon to be 28); whereas a number of other countries aspire to EU membership, as a guarantee for a secure, democratic and prosperous future;
C. whereas the policy of integration over the past decade has shown that enlargement benefits the EU as a whole and allows it to be better positioned to address global challenges;
D. whereas enlargement has been a successful process for the EU and Europe as a whole, in helping to overcome the divisions of the cold war, contributing to peace, stability and prosperity throughout Europe, enhancing conflict prevention, stimulating reforms and consolidating freedom, democracy, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and the rule of law, as well as the development of market economies and socially and ecologically sustainable development;
E. whereas almost twenty years after the Copenhagen European Council of 1993, which affirmed the membership prospects of the countries of Central and Eastern Europe and laid down the accession criteria, the moment has come for a re-evaluation of the established related procedures and of enlargement policy as a whole, without prejudice to the ongoing negotiations;
F. whereas the Copenhagen criteria have stood the test of time and remain at the centre of EU enlargement policy; whereas the consolidated enlargement strategy and the new focus on justice and home affairs, the rule of law and respect for fundamental rights are expected to be effective and efficient;
G. whereas the European Parliament, through its annual resolutions on the candidate and potential candidate countries, contributes to improving the transparency and accountability of the enlargement process by echoing the opinions of the European citizens; whereas, following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, the role of Parliament has increased thanks to the recognition of co-legislative power, inter alia with regard to the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA);
H. whereas the prospect of accession has a significant transformative impact on the political, socio-economic and cultural landscape of the countries wishing to join, and acts as a powerful incentive for pursuing the necessary political, economic and legislative reforms and the strengthening of peace, stability, reconciliation and good neighbourly relations; whereas thanks to this power to bring about change, enlargement is the essence of the EU’s soft power and an important element of its external action;
I. whereas commitment, conditionality and credibility have been situated at the core of the accession process;
J. whereas it is of the utmost importance that Member States continue to fully respect and uphold the accession criteria and fundamental rights, in order to strengthen the credibility and consistency of the enlargement process and avoid any kind of discrimination against potential new members;
K. whereas a commitment to political, economic and legislative reforms is, first and foremost, in the best interests of the candidate and potential candidate countries and their citizens;
L. whereas each country aspiring to EU membership has to be judged on its own merits in fulfilling, implementing and complying with the same set of criteria; whereas the pace of progress in the accession process should be determined by the extent of effective implementation and compliance with the EU accession criteria, as well as fulfilment of the priorities of the European and Accession Partnership and the negotiating framework; whereas the degree of compliance with the requirements for membership has to be assessed in the most fair and transparent fashion;
M. whereas the enlargement process has a significant impact also on the EU itself, serving as an opportunity to better define its identity, goals, values and policies, and also as a suitable moment to better communicate these to its citizens;
N. whereas, in line with the renewed consensus on enlargement of 2006, this process should be based on consolidation, conditionality and communication, combined with the EU’s capacity to integrate new members; whereas the integration capacity of the EU is a major consideration and a prerequisite for the sustainability of enlargement policy and the overall integration process; whereas this consideration has been a positive incentive for institutional deepening, as demonstrated by the consecutive treaty revisions that have accompanied the different waves of enlargement, extending the functions and activities of the Union;
O. whereas true reconciliation between different nations and peoples, the peaceful resolution of conflicts and the establishment of good neighbourly relations between European countries are essential to sustainable peace and stability and contribute substantially to a genuine European integration process, therefore being of key importance to the enlargement process; whereas a number of candidate and potential candidate countries continue to have unresolved issues with their neighbours, and hence all affected parties should work overtly towards the resolution of bilateral tensions; whereas these issues should be resolved prior to accession;
General considerations
1. Strongly supports the enlargement process and believes that enlargement needs to remain a credible policy, supported by the public both in the EU and in the candidate and potential candidate countries; underlines, therefore, the importance for the EU and the candidate and potential candidate countries of fulfilling all obligations, respecting all commitments and creating the conditions for ensuring the success of future enlargements, inter alia by assisting the countries concerned in their efforts to meet the criteria for EU accession;
2. Acknowledges the benefits of the enlargement and accession process, both for the citizens of the candidate and potential candidate countries and for European citizens;
3. Considers that the Copenhagen criteria continue to constitute a fundamental basis and should remain at the heart of enlargement policy; stresses that full and rigorous compliance with these criteria is imperative, that due attention should be paid to the social implications for the candidate and potential candidate countries, and that the Union’s integration capacity must be taken fully into account;
4. Considers that the concept of integration capacity comprises four elements:
(i) accession states should contribute to and not impair the ability of the Union to maintain momentum towards the fulfilment of its political objectives;
(ii) the institutional framework of the Union should be able to deliver efficient and effective government;
(iii) the financial resources of the Union should be sufficient to meet the challenges of economic and social cohesion and of the Union’s common policies;
(iv) a comprehensive communication strategy should be in place to inform public opinion concerning the implications of enlargement;
5. Stresses, however, that the Union is responsible for improving its integration capacity in the process of considering the legitimate European aspirations of candidate, potential candidate or potential applicant countries;
6. Points out that the EU continues to be attractive, also because of its unique combination of economic dynamism with a social model, and regrets that this social dimension has been largely neglected in the enlargement process; invites the Commission to address this issue, especially in the framework of Chapter 19 (Social Policy and Employment), to foster positive social transformation in the future EU Member States and to pay due attention to social justice;
7. Reminds that the acquis in the social field includes minimum standards in areas such as labour law, equal treatment of women and men, health and safety at work and anti-discrimination, and that the EU Treaties confirm commitment to the European Social Charter of 1961 and the Community Charter of the Fundamental Social Rights of Workers of 1989, while the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights also contains a number of fundamental social rights; stresses that failure to comply with the EU’s common basic social standards constitutes a form of social dumping, which is detrimental to European enterprises and workers and would effectively prevent a candidate state from participating in the single market; points out that social partners and in particular trade unions need targeted EU assistance in order to reinforce their capacities;
8. Is of the view that the set of accession criteria should be adequately translated into clear, specific and measurable objectives in the IPA in order to clearly demonstrate the link between Union-funded policies in the enlargement countries and progress in meeting the general accession criteria;
9. Recognises the need for the economies of accession countries to develop in the same direction as those of EU Member States in order to facilitate alignment; encourages the accession countries, accordingly, to formulate feasible and country-specific targets for each of the EU 2020 headline targets for a smart, sustainable and inclusive economy;
10. Draws attention to the importance of the Madrid criteria (defined by the Madrid European Council of December 1995), which emphasised the ability of candidate countries to put EU rules and procedures into effect; also takes the view that the principle of strict conditionality requires that the progress of a candidate and/or potential candidate country in adopting and implementing reforms be effectively assessed on the basis of a clear set of criteria at every stage of the process, and that countries wishing to join the EU should be able to proceed from one stage to the next only once all the conditions have been met at each stage; stresses that, in order to enhance the credibility and effectiveness of the enlargement strategy, the Copenhagen criteria must be fully respected and complied with by Member States as well, in order to avoid requiring applicant countries to meet higher standards than those applying in some EU Member States; stresses the importance of defining the different stages more clearly, setting transparent and fair benchmarks throughout the process that translate the general membership criteria into concrete steps towards accession, and measuring whether the necessary requirements have been met, as well as of avoiding fixing or promising an accession date if negotiations have not yet been finalised; stresses that it should also be clear that a benchmark, once attained, should be sustained and that backsliding should elicit an appropriate response on the part of those setting the benchmarks;
11. Stresses that the objective of the accession process is full EU membership;
12. Calls on the Commission to maintain and further intensify its monitoring of progress in the accession process, as well as its assistance to candidate and potential candidate countries, so as to ensure that they achieve a high degree of preparedness which will benefit both them and the EU;
13. Believes that, in order to maintain the credibility of the enlargement process, the EU’s integration capacity should be evaluated at an early stage and should be properly reflected in the Commission’s ‘opinion’ for each potential candidate state, outlining the major concerns in this regard and the possible ways to overcome them; is of the view that a comprehensive impact assessment should then follow; in this context, emphasises that a successful enlargement process requires that the EU should maintain the capacity to act, to develop, to take decisions democratically and efficiently, to have financial resources to support economic and social cohesion, and to pursue its political objectives;
Enlargement policies
14. Welcomes the new negotiating approach for future negotiating frameworks, which prioritises issues related to the judiciary and fundamental rights, as well as to justice and home affairs; agrees that these should be tackled early in the accession process and that as a rule Chapters 23 and 24 should be opened accordingly on the basis of action plans, as they require the establishment of convincing track records; calls on the Commission to report to Parliament regularly on progress in these areas, and for the monthly pre-accession reports of the EU delegations to be available to the members of the Committee on Foreign Affairs upon request; notes, however, that this focus on the areas in question should not be to the detriment of the efforts and progress made in the other areas outlined in the individual enlargement agendas of the candidate and potential candidate countries;
15. Considers it important to give adequate priority within enlargement policy to the building of an efficient, independent and impartial judicial system and a transparent democratic political system that can strengthen the rule of law; underlines, at the same time, the importance of all forms of freedom of expression and the need to ensure freedom of the media in law and in practice, as well as to effectively fight corruption and organised crime;
16. Stresses that visa liberalisation is a good example of EU conditionality combining political and technical criteria with a desirable goal and tangible benefits; welcomes and supports, therefore, the efforts of the Commission and those of interested countries in this field;
17. Calls on the Commission to simplify the administration procedure and reduce the administrative burden for the IPA funding, with the aim of making it more accessible to and enhancing the participation of smaller and non-centralised civil organisations, trade unions and other beneficiaries;
18. Encourages greater participation by civil society, non-state actors and social partners, both from the candidate countries and the Member States, in the accession process; urges the Commission to keep up a continuous dialogue with them; calls on the candidate and potential candidate countries to ensure their involvement at all stages; stresses that civil society can work as an important engine of approximation with the EU, create bottom-up pressure for the advancement of the European agenda, improve the transparency of the process and strengthen public support for accession; stresses the importance of adequate financial support, inter alia via the Civil Society Facility, especially in order to enhance civil society’s capacities to monitor the implementation of the acquis; stresses the importance of cooperation between European civil society organisations and their counterparts in the candidate and potential candidate countries;
19. Strongly emphasises the need to enhance administrative capacities and human resources in order to make them capable of transposing, implementing and enforcing the acquis; takes the view that processes in the framework of enlargement should not be merely ‘technical’, and stresses the need to make the screening process more connected to the realities on the ground; calls on the Commission, therefore, to involve NGOs, trade unions and major stakeholders, as appropriate, in this exercise;
20. Calls, in recognition of the important role that social dialogue plays in EU decision-making, for greater emphasis on strengthening the capacities of social partners and the role of social dialogue within the enlargement process; asks, furthermore, for more attention to be paid to developing enforcement mechanisms such as labour inspection so as to protect workers and ensure respect for their social rights and health and safety standards, as well as combating exploitation, especially of undeclared workers;
21. Calls for greater engagement of the European Economic and Social Committee (EESC) in the enlargement process; highlights its role in transmitting good practices to candidate and potential candidate countries, as well as in rallying civil society behind the cause of European integration in the EU; supports the further strengthening of dialogue between civil society organisations in the EU and the enlargement countries, and encourages greater cooperation between the EESC, the Commission and the European Parliament;
22. Recalls that achieving sustainable economic recovery is a major challenge for most enlargement countries, and underlines the need to promote smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, in line with the Europe 2020 Strategy; calls for more support for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), given their critical role for socioeconomic progress in all enlargement countries, and urges the Commission to insist on priority reforms that create a favourable regulatory environment for innovative and high-potential SMEs; stresses, at the same time, the need for continued attention to the issues of a growing informal sector, high unemployment, and the integration of the most vulnerable members of society;
23. Believes strongly in the need to promote a climate of tolerance and mutual respect, good neighbourly relations and regional and crossborder cooperation, as prerequisites for stability and as means of facilitating genuine and lasting reconciliation; considers that the prosecution of war crimes, the peaceful coexistence of different ethnic, cultural and religious communities, the protection of minorities and respect for human rights, as well as the reintegration and return of refugees and displaced persons, must remain essential elements of the EU accession process in regions with a history of conflict; in this respect, encourages the candidate and potential candidate countries that have yet to ratify the Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities to do so; suggests that in such cases the promotion of the teaching and learning of each other’s history, language and cultural heritage during and after the accession process would facilitate mutual understanding and contribute to historical reconciliation;
24. Is of the opinion that gender equality and anti-discrimination should be given further priority within enlargement policy; stresses that equality between men and women is a fundamental right, a core value of the EU, and a key principle of its external action, as well as holding great potential for the achievement of the Europe 2020 objectives by contributing to growth and full employment; encourages, therefore, women’s participation in the accession process, and underlines the importance of mainstreaming gender equality policies; stresses that discrimination on all and any grounds is prohibited and that the EU assessments should include the rights of the LGBT community and the integration of minorities in political, social and economic life;
25. Calls on the Commission to involve enlargement countries in its initiatives aiming at social inclusion, such as the EU Framework for National Roma Integration Strategies , to better mobilise the IPA to this end, and to urge enlargement countries, through the mechanism of the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAAP), to realise these goals; also calls on the enlargement countries to actively participate in the Decade for Roma Inclusion and to guarantee the fundamental rights of Roma, improve their social and economic position and ensure their access to housing;
26. Takes the view that any acceding state should resolve its main bilateral problems and major disputes with neighbours, particularly those concerning territorial issues, before it can join the Union; recommends strongly that these issues be addressed as early as possible in the accession process, in a constructive and neighbourly spirit and preferably before the opening of accession negotiations, so that the latter are not negatively affected; in this regard, considers it essential to take account of the EU’s overall interests, its values, and the obligation to fully comply with the acquis and respect the principles on which the EU itself is founded;
27. Calls on the EU to support efforts to resolve outstanding disputes, including border disputes, before accession; in line with the provisions of international law, the UN Charter and the relevant UN resolutions, as well as the Helsinki Final Act, encourages all parties to disputes whose continuation is likely to impair implementation of the acquis or endanger the preservation of international peace and security to engage constructively in their peaceful resolution and, if appropriate, in case of not being able to reach a bilateral agreement, to refer the matter to the International Court of Justice or to commit themselves to a binding arbitration mechanism of their choice or else work constructively within an intensive mediation mission; reiterates its call on the Commission and the Council to start developing, in accordance with the EU Treaties, an arbitration mechanism aimed at resolving bilateral and multilateral disputes;
28. Welcomes initiatives such as the positive agenda on Turkey, the high-level accession dialogue with the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, and the structured dialogue on the rule of law with Kosovo[1]; welcomes the aim of creating a fresh dynamic in the reform process, while stressing that these initiatives must in no way replace the formal negotiation procedures, but must be fully in line with the negotiating framework;
29. Stresses the need for candidate and potential candidate countries to make improvements in the fields of democracy, human rights, and reconciliation processes, areas which should always be given priority in the enlargement process and reflected in the financial instruments; recalls, in this regard, the importance of financial assistance taking into account the need for to restore cultural heritage sites in conflict areas, bearing in mind the role this has in terms of building confidence and inclusiveness between different ethnic and religious communities;
30. Stresses that EU enlargement policy is an instrument for modernisation, democratisation and stabilisation, and also has the aim of strengthening the EU, both internally and as a global player; calls on the Commission to undertake comprehensive impact assessments whenever it considers new applications for EU membership, and also when it recommends the opening or, in case of fundamentally changed circumstances, the closing of accession negotiations;
31. Supports the Commission’s commitment to improving the quality of the accession process by making it more merit-based, benchmark-driven and transparent; takes the view that this will make the process fairer and more objectively measurable, thus further enhancing its credibility; in this context, recommends that the progress reports should be clearer in their assessments; stresses that the benchmarks should not set additional conditions for the candidate and potential candidate countries, but should translate the general membership criteria and the objectives of the EU’s pre-accession assistance into concrete steps and results with a view to accession, in full compliance with the negotiating framework;
32. Emphasises the vital importance for the success of the accession process of the fight against corruption and organised crime; calls on the Commission to adopt a new approach to this issue by drawing the attention of the authorities of aspirant countries to individual instances of systemic corruption; calls on the Commission to cooperate closely with the Group of States against Corruption (GRECO) and with the anti-corruption bodies in the countries concerned; stresses that such a new approach would be highly beneficial for the image of the Union among the citizens of the aspirant countries and would potentially facilitate the fight against corruption;
33. Urges the Commission to plan a non-decrease in real terms of overall funding for each beneficiary; notes that this calculation should be made taking into consideration the following: a) the ratio of overall programmed IPA assistance to each country’s GDP should not decrease in relative terms even if, in real terms, the denominator (GDP) for each beneficiary country has shown a cumulative increase over the period 2007-2013; b) the number of countries with access to funding through the future instrument is likely to decrease with the accession of Croatia, which would potentially change the comparative redistribution within the pool of funding; c) with the suggested changes to the new Instrument serving to remove differentiation between countries on the basis of their candidacy status, more countries will be able to access funding – hitherto inaccessible to non-candidate countries – earmarked for policy areas focusing on socioeconomic development; recommends, in this context, that no beneficiary be precluded from sufficient and fair access to funding due to limited EU resources, in particular as regards the policy area of institution-building;
34. Recalls the need to accompany EU enlargement with a concerted and more effective and transparent communication policy involving all EU institutions, the governments and parliaments of the Member States, and representatives of civil society, with a view to triggering an open and frank debate on the consequences of enlargement, encompassing public opinion in both the EU Member States and the candidate countries; stresses that a communication policy of this kind should also be applied in the candidate countries, in cooperation with all actors;
35. Is of the opinion that, in order to encourage support among EU citizens for further enlargement and the commitment of the citizens of the candidate and potential candidate countries to continuing with reforms, it is crucial to present clear and comprehensive information on the political, socioeconomic and cultural benefits of enlargement; considers it essential, in particular, to explain to the public how enlargement has brought new investment and export opportunities, and how it can contribute to attaining the EU’s objectives in terms of promoting conflict prevention, enhancing peaceful conflict resolution, tackling the economic crisis, creating jobs, facilitating the free flow of labour, protecting the environment and enhancing security and safety, while at the same time accelerating the reform agenda, facilitating access to financial resources and subsequently improving living conditions in the enlargement countries for the benefit of all European citizens, as well as reducing social and economic imbalances; stresses the need to target all sectors of society by promoting, inter alia, the inclusion, at secondary school level or the equivalent, of a specific curricular element on the background, objectives and functioning of the European Union as well as its enlargement processes; also stresses the need to target key opinion formers such as journalists, representatives of civil society, and socioeconomic actors and trade unions; is of the view that similar efforts by candidate and potential candidate countries should be encouraged and supported;
Prospects and the EU’s strategic interests
36. Believes strongly that the EU can gain great strategic benefits through enlargement policy; emphasises that EU membership provides stability in the swiftly changing international environment, and that belonging to the European Union continues to offer the perspective of social development and prosperity; is of the opinion that enlargement is a long-term strategic interest of the EU, which cannot necessarily be measured in terms of short-term balance sheets; considers it important to take due account of its substantial and lasting value as representing soft but nevertheless essential power for the EU;
37. Remains fully committed to the prospect of enlargement, and calls on the Member States to maintain the momentum of the enlargement process; stresses its conviction that with the Lisbon Treaty the EU can both pursue its enlargement agenda and maintain the impetus of deeper integration;
38. Recognises, however, that not all European states will choose to seek full membership and that some which do seek it will not fulfil the accession criteria; recommends, therefore, that at the next general revision of the Treaties, without prejudice to any ongoing enlargement negotiations, Parliament should initiate a discussion on the introduction of a new category of associate membership of the Union;
39. Recalls that the process is not concluded with the simple transposition of the acquis, and stresses the importance of effective implementation and respect in the long term as regards both the acquis and the Copenhagen criteria; considers that in order to maintain the credibility of the accession conditions, EU Member States should also be assessed for their continued compliance with the EU’s fundamental values and the fulfilment of their commitments concerning the functioning of democratic institutions and the rule of law; calls on the Commission to work out a detailed proposal for a monitoring mechanism, building on the provisions of Article 7 TEU and Article 258 TFEU;
40. Recalls that a streamlined, forward-looking enlargement policy could be a valuable strategic tool for the EU’s and the region’s economic development, and should aim to create budgetary synergies and enhanced coordination between the various measures and types of assistance provided by the EU, Member States and IFIs, as well as with the existing instruments, namely the IPA, by avoiding any potential overlap, duplications or gaps in funding, particularly in the context of a constrained budgetary environment;
41. Notes that the global financial crisis and the difficulties of the eurozone have highlighted the interdependence of national economies, both within and beyond the EU; emphasises, therefore, the importance of further consolidating economic and financial stability and fostering growth, also in the candidate and potential candidate countries; in these difficult circumstances, stresses the need to provide adequate and better-targeted pre-accession financial assistance to candidate and potential candidate countries; notes the Commission’s proposal for a new IPA, including increased financial support for the financial perspective 2014-2020; stresses, in this regard, the need to simplify and speed up procedures, as well as to strengthen the administrative capacity of the beneficiary countries, in order to ensure a high level of participation in EU programmes and to enhance absorption capacity; points out that a comprehensive position of the European Parliament on the IPA will be presented in the course of the ordinary legislative procedure; highlights the importance of national fiscal stability and the increased focus at EU level on economic governance; recommends that the question of sound public finances be properly addressed in the accession process;
42. Stresses that the goals of Europe 2020 are built around universal principles which have been a strong driver for economic wellbeing; recommends, therefore, that progress on flagship initiatives be included in the pre-accession dialogue and incentivised with additional funding; considers that a low-carbon growth model merits special attention and should be actively implemented during the enlargement process;
43. Calls for continuous inter-donor dialogue and, where appropriate, the use of suitable structures for aid coordination and management; calls, in this context, for closer examination of the use of innovative financial instruments requiring coordination structures, such as, for example, the Western Balkans Investment Framework, which is complementary to the administrative structures for the IPA and has the goal of attracting, pooling and channelling support for priority areas; emphasises the financial and policy leverage potential of financing projects using a combination of funds – from the EU, the Member States or the IFIs – in a manner that ensures both strict concordance with best practice in terms of financial management and the coordination of key actors;
°
° °
44. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council, the Commission, and the Governments and Parliaments of the Member States and of Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Iceland, Kosovo, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey.
- [1] This designation is without prejudice to positions on status, and is in line with UNSCR 1244/1999 and the ICJ Opinion on the Kosovo declaration of independence.
OPINION of the Committee on Budgets (10.5.2012)
for the Committee on Foreign Affairs
on Enlargement: policies, criteria and the EU’s strategic interests
(2012/2025(INI))
Rapporteur: Nadezhda Neynsky
SUGGESTIONS
The Committee on Budgets calls on the Committee on Foreign Affairs, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions in its motion for a resolution:
1. Recalls that a streamlined, forward-looking enlargement policy could be a valuable strategic tool for the EU’s and the region’s economic development, and should aim to create budgetary synergies and enhanced coordination between the various measures and types of assistance provided by the EU, Member States and international financial institutions (IFIs), as well as with existing instruments, namely the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA), by avoiding any potential overlap, duplications or gaps in funding, especially in a constrained budgetary environment;
2. Notes the suggested increase of 7.3 % in the Instrument for Pre-Accession for the next multiannual financial framework (from EUR 11.668 billion in 2007–2013 to EUR 12.520 billion in 2014–2020, in constant 2011 prices[1]) and welcomes the proposed changes, in particular as regards enhanced differentiation of assistance according to the specific needs of each beneficiary country, incentives for good performance, the sector-based approach, conditionalities, transparency and accountability, and the improved use of instruments and collaboration with partners to create greater financial and policy leverage; calls for a simplification of funding rules in order to reduce the administrative burden and enhance the participation of civil society and non-governmental organisations in funding programmes; favours continued support for institutional reforms and public sector capacity building, with the view of establishing reliable institutional structures for the management of funds in beneficiary countries; emphasises the need for continuous efforts in the fight against corruption;
3. Urges the Commission to plan a non-decrease in real terms of overall funding for each beneficiary; notes that this calculation should be made while taking into consideration the following: a) the ratio of overall programmed IPA assistance to each country’s GDP should not decrease in relative terms even if, in real terms, the denominator (GDP) for each beneficiary country will have shown a cumulative increase over the period 2007-2013, b) the number of countries with access to funding through the future instrument is likely to decrease with the accession of Croatia, which would potentially change the comparative redistribution within the pool of funding, and c) with suggested changes to the new Instrument, serving to remove differentiation between countries on the basis of their candidacy status, more countries will be able to access funding – hitherto inaccessible to non-candidate countries – earmarked for policy areas focusing on socio-economic development; recommends, in this context, that no beneficiary be precluded from sufficient and fair access to funding due to limited EU resources, in particular as regards the policy area of institution-building;
4. Underlines that the goals of Europe 2020 are built around universal principles which have been a strong driver for economic well-being; therefore, recommends that progress on flagship initiatives is included in the pre-accession dialogue and incentivised with additional funding; considers that a low-carbon growth model merits special attention and should actively be implemented during the enlargement process;
5. Highlights the systemic importance of national fiscal stability and the increased EU focus on economic governance within the realms of European legislation; thus, recommends that the pre-accession dialogue addresses the role of sound public finances; also recommends that the goals of the enlargement policy are carefully aligned to reflect the growth-oriented EU agenda to modernise the economy, boost competitiveness, improve conditions for SMEs and tackle youth unemployment; stresses the importance of including civil society and social partners in the accession process; recalls the need to foster participation of civil society organisations in the funding programmes;
6. Insists that candidate countries should make full use of the learning curve of – and the period of exposure to – the instrument for pre-accession assistance in order to improve their administrative capacity and ensure a successful absorption of EU funds;
7. Calls for continuous inter-donor dialogue and, where appropriate, the use of suitable structures for aid coordination and management; calls, in this context, for closer examination of the use of innovative financial instruments requiring coordination structures, such as, for example, the Western Balkans Investment Framework, which is complimentary to the administrative structures for the IPA and which has the goal to attract, pool and channel support to priority areas; emphasises the financial and policy leverage potential of financing projects using a combination of funds – from either the EU, Member States or IFIs – in a manner that ensures both strict concordance with best practices for financial management and the coordination of key actors;
8. Underlines the importance of providing a sufficient level of resources for both pre- and post-accession assistance, highlighting that adequate allocations of funds early in the process should create the necessary institutional and economic conditions for a lesser involvement at a later stage;
9. Stresses the need for candidate and potential candidate countries to make improvements in the fields of democracy, human rights, and reconciliation processes, areas which should always be given priority in the enlargement process and reflected in the financial instruments; recalls, in this regard, the importance of financial assistance taking into account the need for to restore cultural heritage sites in conflict areas, bearing in mind the role this has in terms of building confidence and inclusiveness between different ethnic and religious communities.
RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE
|
Date adopted |
10.5.2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
Result of final vote |
+: –: 0: |
24 2 1 |
|||
|
Members present for the final vote |
Francesca Balzani, Zuzana Brzobohatá, Göran Färm, Eider Gardiazábal Rubial, Salvador Garriga Polledo, Ivars Godmanis, Lucas Hartong, Jutta Haug, Monika Hohlmeier, Sidonia Elżbieta Jędrzejewska, Anne E. Jensen, Ivailo Kalfin, Sergej Kozlík, Jan Kozłowski, Alain Lamassoure, Giovanni La Via, George Lyon, Claudio Morganti, Juan Andrés Naranjo Escobar, Nadezhda Neynsky, Dominique Riquet, Derek Vaughan, Angelika Werthmann |
||||
|
Substitute(s) present for the final vote |
Alexander Alvaro, Paul Rübig, Peter Šťastný, Georgios Stavrakakis |
||||
- [1] All figures used in this opinion are based on the calculations provided by DG BUDG of the European Commission
RESULT OF FINAL VOTE IN COMMITTEE
|
Date adopted |
13.9.2012 |
|
|
|
|
|
Result of final vote |
+: –: 0: |
62 1 0 |
|||
|
Members present for the final vote |
Bastiaan Belder, Elmar Brok, Jerzy Buzek, Tarja Cronberg, Mário David, Michael Gahler, Marietta Giannakou, Ana Gomes, Andrzej Grzyb, Richard Howitt, Anna Ibrisagic, Liisa Jaakonsaari, Anneli Jäätteenmäki, Jelko Kacin, Ioannis Kasoulides, Tunne Kelam, Nicole Kiil-Nielsen, Maria Eleni Koppa, Andrey Kovatchev, Paweł Robert Kowal, Wolfgang Kreissl-Dörfler, Eduard Kukan, Ryszard Antoni Legutko, Krzysztof Lisek, Ulrike Lunacek, Mario Mauro, Willy Meyer, Francisco José Millán Mon, Alexander Mirsky, María Muñiz De Urquiza, Annemie Neyts-Uyttebroeck, Raimon Obiols, Ria Oomen-Ruijten, Pier Antonio Panzeri, Ioan Mircea Paşcu, Alojz Peterle, Bernd Posselt, Hans-Gert Pöttering, Cristian Dan Preda, Libor Rouček, Tokia Saïfi, José Ignacio Salafranca Sánchez-Neyra, Nikolaos Salavrakos, György Schöpflin, Werner Schulz, Adrian Severin, Marek Siwiec, Sophocles Sophocleous, Charles Tannock, Sir Graham Watson, Boris Zala |
||||
|
Substitute(s) present for the final vote |
Laima Liucija Andrikienė, Charalampos Angourakis, Jean-Jacob Bicep, Andrew Duff, Hélène Flautre, Kinga Gál, Elisabeth Jeggle, Jean Roatta, Helmut Scholz |
||||
|
Substitute(s) under Rule 187(2) present for the final vote |
Margrete Auken, Spyros Danellis, Georgios Koumoutsakos |
||||