Hungarian Presidency priorities, achievements and challenges in the Cohesion Policy area

1. Hungarian Presidency priorities, achievements and challenges in the Cohesion Policy area Attila Szakáts, National Development Agency, Coordination MA 19 April 2011 New Member States Conference on Cohesion Policy Pilsen, Czech Republic

2. HU PRES and Cohesion Policy • Objectives and strategy of HU PRES in Cohesion Policy • Achievements so far • Council Conclusions and GAC orientation debate • High Level Meeting on the Future of Cohesion Policy • Challenges ahead

3. HU PRES and Cohesion Policy • Objectives and strategy of HU PRES in Cohesion Policy • Achievements so far • Council Conclusions and GAC orientation debate • High Level Meeting on the Future of Cohesion Policy • Challenges ahead

4. Objectives and strategy – 1 Overall objectives of HU PRES – „umbrella” • Post-crisis Europe, scarce resources • Voices questioning CP, sectoral vs. cohesion  • we need CP more than ever, and need it to work well • to stress importance, efficiency and effectiveness of Cohesion Policy • improve visibility, transparency of Cohesion Policy • Level where the debate takes place is crucial (no council formation)  • to strengthen the position of Cohesion Policy at a high political level Specific objectives of HU PRES – current stage of CP • 5th Cohesion Report was published just before HU PRES • detailed discussion is a task of HU PRES  • concentrate on identifying potential problem areas in the concepts • to reach a common interpretation of key issues between MSs and COM

5. Objectives and strategy – 2 Why these specific objectives? • A stable regulatory framework is pre-requisite for the timely launch of the programmes of the next period, but • Gap between the conclusions of the 5th CR and the regulations both in composition… • Conclusions of the 5th Cohesion Report: conceptional ideas • Regulations: concrete legal text, implementation details • …and in time • 5th Cohesion Report: November 2010 • Legislative package: (poss.) July 2011 • Inevitable to bridge the gap and fill it with • Fruitful discussions on key topics such as • Thematic concentration • Result-oriented approach • Integrated approach

6. Objectives and strategy – 3 • MEANS of realising objectives • To underline the importance of Cohesion Policy at several fora(Prime Minister’s speech at the 5th Cohesion Forum, 31st Jan – 1st Feb) • To place (placed) Cohesion Policy on the agenda on the General Affairs Council(21st February 2011), to adopt (adopted) Council Conclusions on the 5th Cohesion Report here as well as encouraged orientation debate on this political level • To initiate thematic discussions on key issues in the Council working group(SAWP) and at expertlevels(HLM) to be channeled into a political level debate of the ministers responsible(informal ministerial meeting) • To provide Presidency Conclusions and summary as input for the debate on the legislative package

7. HU PRES and Cohesion Policy • Objectives and strategy of HU PRES in Cohesion Policy • Achievements so far • Council Conclusions and GAC orientation debate • High Level Meeting on the Future of Cohesion Policy • Challenges ahead

8. 18 – 20 May Informal Ministerial Meeting Gödöllő 23–24 May COCOF Stakeholder Dialogue Budapest Events in Mainstream Cohesion Policy 31 March – 1 April High Level Meeting on the future of Cohesion Policy Budapest 16–17 June Informal SAWP (attaché trip) Bátonyterenye Now 2011 February March April May June January 4 SAWPs in January ( conclusions) 2 SAWPs in February ( conclusions) 2 SAWPs in March (key topics) 1 SAWP in April (key topics) 1SAWP in May (key topics) European Council 21 February GAC Council Conclusions on the 5th Cohesion Report Orientation debate 31 Jan – 1 Feb. Cohesion Forum Prime Minister’s speech COCOF 9 February, 23 March, 20 April, 29 June

9. Achievements: Council Conclusions – 1 • Background • Were prepared by HU PRES as a response to the 5th Cohesion Report • Result of intensive work in the SAWP in Jan-Feb (weekly) • Unanimously approved by GAC on 21st February 2011 • Aims • Apart from being a formal Council response, the Conclusions intended… • …to pinpoint and summarise those issues of the debate where there is a consensus between MSs • …but also to identify those issues where further debate is needed… • …and by this ultimately to provide a common basis for the Council work to follow during the semester

10. Achievements: Council Conclusions – 2 Main messages • Consensus on the importance of CP as a tool for European integration • MSs made further commitment to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of Cohesion Policy through • Focusing investment on a limited number of key priorities that respect the needs and potentials of MSs, regions, and the local level; alignment of CP and EU2020 objectives must be done in a way the objectives of both frameworks are respected! • An integrated approach: the importance of better coordination between EU Funds; the potential added value of the CSF; • A clear and transparent implementation system that has to be built on our achievements so far.

11. Achievements: Council Conclusions – 3 Also - where further debate is needed • The role and nature of the Development and Investment Partnership Contract • List of thematic priorities to be used in thematic concentration • The system of conditionalities and incentives • In the focal point of Council work (common ground needed!) Orientation debate at GAC • On the agenda of the same meeting of the GAC • Reinforced the messages of the Council Conclusions • Put the debate on a formal Council forum – political level – for the first time! (PL intentions)

12. Achievements: High Level Meeting – 1 Background • Was the next big milestone of HU PRES • Organised in Budapest on 31st March – 1st April • 150 participants from MSs, COM, high-level experts • Aim to highlight the importance of Cohesion Policy • discussion on key issues, try to reach common interpretation • also: emphasise the need for an integrated approach and introduce possible new methodologies: LDMR, a HU good practice for integrated local development; Value engineering Main topics • Selected from among the key issues of the debate where further discussions are needed (GAC), namely • Thematic concentration and flexibility • Result-oriented approach (conditionalities and incentives) • Two discussion papers were issued • Conclusions of the Meeting based on synthesised work of three parallel sections on each of these topics

13. Achievements: High Level Meeting – 2 Concerning thematic concentration and flexibility (outline) • Articulated thatthe twofold objective of thematic concentration that is increasing the effectiveness of Cohesion Policy and the alignment with the EU 2020 Strategy is acceptable. However, increasing the effectivenessregarded astronger objective. • Connection between Cohesion Policy and EU 2020: stated that the original objectives of Cohesion Policy remain the same, but the Policy can make a significant contribution to EU 2020 by eliminating bottlenecks of growth via unlocking underutilised potentials. While regarding the goals of CP and EU 2020 mutually reinforcing – they also stated that Cohesion Policy is not solely responsible for the success of the Strategy! • Different starting points: emphasised that flexibility should be allowed for Member States and regions in defining their own development prioritiesand actions as there are no „one-size-fits-all” solutions. • Some doubts were raised about the close link with NRPs:different from the development strategy of CP in nature, approach, function and time scope. • Alternative ways may be explored: e.g. validating thematic concentration rather on the output/result side of structural action than on the input side as proposed.

14. Achievements: High Level Meeting – 3 Concerning the result-oriented approach (outline) • Conditionalities as means of result-orientation:agreed on thenecessity to enhance the result-oriented approach of Cohesion Policy, but pointed out a lack of clarity of concepts and expressed some concernsabout a possible new system of conditionalities and incentives. • Integrated approach: formulated that possible different conditionality systems for ERDF and ESF may bring complexity and hinder the integrated approach. • Continuity and simplification: concluded that new conditionalities shouldbuild on accumulated experience and cannot result inadditional layers of monitoring and control, thus increasingadministrative burdens – on the contrary: they should serve simplification. • Nature of conditionalities: (esp. structural reform conditionality and conditionalities external to Cohesion Policy) conditionalities should unambiguouslyhave a direct link with the effectiveness of Cohesion Policy; their fulfilment needs to beobjectively assessable; and affected actors need to have the competence and capacity to influence them. • Ownership:it was regarded extremely important that conditionalities could be implemented on the ground; actors have ownership of them. • Methodological tools:appropriate databases and tools need to be developed!

15. HU PRES and Cohesion Policy • Objectives and strategy of HU PRES in Cohesion Policy • Achievements so far • Council Conclusions and GAC orientation debate • High Level Meeting on the Future of Cohesion Policy • Challenges ahead

16. Challenges ahead Keep discussion at a high political level • Informal Ministerial Meeting, 19th–20th May 2011 (1-territorial cohesion/ 2-CP) • Venue: Royal Palace of Gödöllő, official conference venue of HU PRES (30 kms from Budapest) • Participation: head of delegation (+partner) + 3 delegates (EU Member States, Croatia, Turkey, Norway, Switzerland, Iceland), European Commission, EP, European Investment Bank, Committee of the Regions, ECOSOC); cost covered for HoD+1 delegate • Seating: 1+2 in the plenary room (pin+red badge), 1 in listening room (blue badge) • Aims of the Meeting • Apart from the high-level debate… • …to improve the alignment with EU 2020, find ways to enhance effectiveness • …to draw Conclusions based on the main, common messages of MSs Preliminary agenda • Keynote speeches (Fellegi, Hahn, Andor) • Discussion – how can CP be more effective in achieving results? • Discussion – how to make CPcontribute more effectively to the Europe 2020 Strategy? • Tour de table - reaction of the ministers • Presentation of the CP agenda of PL PRES • Presidency Conclusions

17. Challenges ahead Information to be channeled into the political debate • All the information and documents produced so far (Council Conclusions, HLM Conclusions, SAWP meetings) • SAWP work: ongoing key issue debates in March-Mayon topics in COM proposals and ones identified as problematic in the Council Conclusions • Reinforced strategic programming: alignment of programming/documents with EU2020 • Delivery mechanisms: possibilities for simplification • Integrated approach: better harmonisation of Funds and Common Policies • Result-orientation: revisiting and further elaborating on the issue • Summary document to be compiled at the end • Two concise documents to be prepared on thematic concentration and the result oriented approach to provoke discussion. We hope that… • By mapping MS opinions and identifying bottlenecks we get closer to a common interpretation in key issues  achieve presidency objectives(result orientation, visibility, integrated approach) • Prepare the ground for the forthcoming Polish Presidency for formal discussions on the draft Regulation • Thus contribute to the timely start of the programmes of post 2014 CP

18. Thank you for your attention! Attila Szakáts, Senior Advisor Coordination Managing Authority, National Development Agency E-mail: attila.szakats@nfu.gov.hu, Phone: +36 1 474-9284