Toespraak eurocommissaris Andor over de territoriale dimensie van het Europees Structureel Fonds

Minister Bienkowska,

President Bresso,

Ministers,

Honourable Members,

Ladies and gentlemen,

It is a great pleasure to be here today at this conference on the territorial dimension of the European Social Fund. I would like to congratulate the Polish Presidency on an impressive programme and to thank you for the important contribution that you have made over this past year to the debate on the future of Cohesion Policy.

Indeed I have had the opportunity to come to Poland twice since July to discuss the subject and the future of the ESF. First to take part in the debate on evidence-based cohesion policy; and most recently to exchange views on future European instruments for employment.

Both of these events have provided very useful input to our preparations on the future regulations.

We are rapidly approaching the much anticipated time when the Commission will make its proposals on the future of structural and cohesion funds - next week the College will finalize the regulatory texts to be sent to the Council and the European Parliament.

I know that the Polish Presidency is looking forward to launching the negotiation process and I am confident that you will put the negotiations on the right track.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Our discussions today focus on the territorial dimension of the European Social Fund - and I will address this subject shortly.

However, allow me first to take this opportunity to highlight two key principles behind the Commission's upcoming proposals for the future ESF:

• - 

  to invest more in people;
• - 

  and to invest better.

Main features of the future ESF

First, across Europe, we need to invest more into our human and social capital - and the EU budget must reflect this.

The European Social Fund is the EU's main instrument for investing in people, and has a key role in supporting progress on three out of the five headline targets established by the Europe 2020 Strategy:

• - 

  to increase the employment rate among 20-64 year-olds to 75% by 2020 (up from 68.6% in 2010);
• - 

  to lift at least 20 million people out of the risk of poverty or social exclusion;
• - 

  and to improve the performance of our education systems so as to reduce the number of early school leavers from over 14% to less than 10%, and increase the number of young people completing tertiary education to 40% (from 32.3%).

It goes without saying that investment in human capital will also be vital if we are to achieve our targets regarding R&D and energy and climate change, as these will also require highly skilled people.

In order to deliver on the Europe 2020 Strategy, it is of crucial importance that all Member States focus their structural funds allocations on the achievement of these targets and of the objectives of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth. Therefore, the Commission proposed already in June to establish minimum shares for the European Social Fund in each category of regions, as one of the ways of ensuring the necessary concentration of funding.

The minimum shares - 25, 40 and 52 per cent of the structural funds envelope in convergence, transition and competitiveness regions respectively - would together guarantee a minimum budget of €84 billion for the ESF over seven years. This would represent a 7.5% increase compared to the current period. I believe that in the context of the challenges Europe faces in the post-crisis era, this is indeed a necessary minimum.

Second, while we certainly need to invest more; we also need to invest better. This is particularly important in these times of severe budgetary constraints.

This means investing in the right priorities, setting the right framework and establishing a more effective delivery system.

The Commission has carefully examined what we have and have not achieved to date and, from this, we have developed the new ESF as an instrument for the future. An instrument that is more focused, more effective, simpler to use, and better coordinated with others.

This basically means four things:

One - Member States and regions will have to concentrate resources on a limited number of key priorities. They will define their operational programmes based on an EU-wide set of "thematic objectives", and more detailed "investment priorities", which follow from the Europe 2020 strategy. The choice of investment priorities should obviously respond to the key challenges faced by the given Member State, as identified in the National Reform Programme.

Two - to enhance effectiveness, the new cohesion policy will ensure that the right framework conditions are in place, including through a common system of conditionalities. Appropriate legislation, strategies and implementation capacities will have to be in place or will have to be developed in early stages of the programming period in order for EU investments to achieve maximum results.

Three - the Commission will propose ways to simplify the delivery system and put beneficiaries centre-stage.

Our recent experience with simplified reimbursements has proven that this approach reduces administrative burden for everyone.

We want to build on this to facilitate even greater use of simplified cost options in the next programming period, as well as introduce more proportionality in relation to the management and control of programmes and operations.

In addition, we are also looking at introducing a brand new instrument, known as the "Joint Action Plan", whereby payments would be made on the basis of pre-defined budgets and verified results, rather than detailed verification of costs.

These simplifications can have large benefits in day-to-day implementation and will enable us to move towards a system that focuses on results rather than on inputs.

Finally - and here I am already approaching the territorial dimension - the new legislative framework will also stimulate better coordination between the ESF and other funds - at all levels.

At the EU level, the Common Strategic Framework will identify the thematic objectives and investment priorities to ensure they are fully aligned with Europe 2020. It will minimize funding gaps or overlaps between the different EU Funds and ensure that they form a coherent whole.

At national level, Partnership Contracts will provide the basic coordinating framework for EU support from the different Funds in each Member State. Having their starting point in the National Reform Programmes, these partnership contracts will connect EU priorities with national and regional needs.

Moreover, Member States will also be able to opt for multi-fund operational programmes at national or regional level, if they believe that this would allow for better coordination and synergies between the Funds.

At local level, a number of programming instruments will be available to facilitate and integrated approach.

Territorial dimension of the ESF

Ladies and gentlemen,

This brings me to the territorial dimension of the ESF.

This dimension stems directly from the dual treaty base of the ESF:

• - 

  On the one hand, the ESF is a tool for improving employment, employability, adaptation and the standard of living.
• - 

  On the other hand, it is a tool contributing to economic, social and territorial cohesion.

And there are several important reasons to continue to strengthen the ESF's territorial dimension:

First, the Lisbon Strategy introduced 'territorial' as a specific objective, in addition to the goals of economic and social cohesion.

Second, we are facing ever more complex challenges in terms of development. In a globalised economy, competition is increasingly present between regions rather than countries. The spatial dimension of economic specialization means that increased attention has to be paid to local labour markets and development of skills that are relevant in a given location.

Third, we see considerable social disparities both between and within regions. When fighting poverty and social exclusion, place-based policy interventions are increasingly important and regional and local authorities have a crucial role to play.

The Commission is fully aware that we will not meet the Europe 2020 goals unless we develop successful partnerships between European, national, regional and local institutions. Operational programmes and projects must be designed and implemented at the right level and attention must be paid to the role of cities, functional geographies, and areas facing specific geographical or demographic problems.

Past and current territorialisation of the ESF

Ladies and gentlemen,

The term 'territorial cohesion' has just recently been coined in the Treaty, but we are certainly not starting from scratch.

The territorial dimension has been at the heart of Cohesion Policy since its inception notably through the concentration of financial resources on the poorest regions with the objective of reducing regional disparities.

Programmes have been tailored to regional needs, and the strong territorial dimension of the current ESF is illustrated by the fact that more than two-thirds of ESF Operational Programmes are regional. And also national ESF programmes have in most cases specific regional or sub-regional elements. Many Member States have put in place regional partnerships - for example Poland, but also France, Sweden, Austria or Hungary.

Beyond the regional level, there has also been growing awareness of the need to tailor development interventions to the particular attributes of sub-regional territories - their natural resources, fixed capital, and human and social capital.

Indeed, for over a decade, the ESF has been supporting the development of local approaches in the field of employment and social inclusion - for example through territorial employment pacts, local employment initiatives or local social capital schemes.

Today, the ESF specifically funds actions to promote "partnerships, pacts and initiatives at transnational, national, regional and local levels in order to mobilise for reforms in the field of employment and labour market inclusion ".

Around 939 million euros have been earmarked for the promotion of partnerships and pacts, often at regional and local level.

And this figure certainly does not cover all the actions with strong territorial character which are implemented under other priorities such as "adaptability of workers", "access to employment", "human capital" or "pathways to integration for disadvantaged people".

Territorialisation in the future ESF

Ladies and Gentlemen,

The Commission shares the view expressed by the European Parliament a year ago that the "efficacy of the ESF depends on its ability to adapt to the various problems that emerge from local and territorial specificities".

As such, we want to encourage a more territorialised, bottom-up approach in the next programming period, while keeping in mind European and national challenges and objectives.

It will continue to be very important in ESF implementation that we think globally and act locally.

The Commission does not intend to constrain Member States in their choice about the number of operational programmes, their territorial level and the public authorities in charge of managing them. It would be against the very principle of subsidiarity to do so.

Instead, these choices need to be made by the Member States themselves in line with their territorial specificities and institutional arrangements. The ESF should be used at the relevant level by the authorities in charge of the actions considered by the National Reform Programmes as the most important.

However, the Commission is determined to ensure that the partnership contracts and the operational programmes provide:

• - 

  A comprehensive analysis of the disparities and the development needs of the territories;
• - 

  An integrated strategy for territorial development supported by the Funds, in particular in favour of urban, rural and coastal areas and areas with particular territorial features;
• - 

  And integrated strategies to address the specific needs of geographical areas most affected by poverty or of target groups at highest risk of discrimination or exclusion, with special regard to marginalized communities.

These specific needs should be addressed through the relevant investment priorities of the ESF.

The Commission also intends to facilitate community-led initiatives that designed and implemented by local action groups. These actors should be able to draw resources from different funds to finance integrated, multi-sectoral strategies.

In addition, we want to see the ESF used in a more systematic way to support sustainable urban development, in close synergy with the European Regional Development Fund.

Deprived urban areas and huge inequalities within our cities are a major societal challenge, as we were reminded once again by recent events in the UK.

Sustainable urban development requires multi-dimensional solutions and good coordination of actions supported by the ERDF and ESF. Integrated strategies are essential to fight urban deprivation and poverty and to build the skills needed in functional urban economies.

To support this, the Commission is looking into a new instrument to facilitate the design and implementation of integrated urban development strategies throughout different priority axes and even programmes.

Ladies and gentlemen,

We believe that these proposals will enhance the territorial dimension of the European Social Fund.

But I want to stress that an enabling legal framework is not, in itself, enough to foster a more territorialised ESF.

It requires a strong commitment at national, regional and local levels to develop targeted, place-based actions that deliver national and European objectives. It takes long-term willingness to cooperate and work together at all stages of the programming and implementation cycle.

I count on your support to make this happen.