The reform of the Structural Funds is intended to improve the efficiency of EU regional policy and accommodate the costs of EU enlargement through concentration of spending, simplification of bureaucracy and decentralisation of administration. For much of the past year, the key budgetary decisions have been deadlocked, pending the outcome of the German elections. Unlike previous reforms, the richer Member States are unwilling to make an increased contribution to the EU budget, and several are pressing for their budgetary imbalances to be reduced, a stance opposed by cohesion countries concerned at the implications of EU enlargement. The other contentious negotiating issue is area designation: the indicators and data used for designating the new Objective 1 and 2 areas; and the proposed coherence between designated regional policies. With respect to programming, the Commission proposes to withdraw from detailed involvement in programme implementation but intends to maintain influence by specifying Community priorities, more rigorous supervision, reporting and monitoring requirements and a controversial performance reserve scheme. Overall, the reform proposals involve relatively limited change; the hard questions concerning enlargement have been shelved. The future rationale for EU structural policy and the importance placed on cohesion remain open questions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
John Bachtler (1998) studied this question.