1. Mobilising structural funds as a response to the crisis:
Developments and EAPN response
Elodie Fazi, EAPN
6 February 2009

2. Background: EU response crisis
2. Which changes to cohesion policy?
3. Which EAPN response?

3. 1. Background: the crisis and how the EU responded

4. 1. EU response to the crisis
Harshest economic (and social) crisis in EU’s history Unemployment rate 8.4% in 2009 (Nov. estimates)
EU response: Economic recovery package (Oct. 2008)
Coordination national stimulus packages (200 billion € (170 nat. Budgets + 30 EU) to boost demand
Supporting smart investment through EU action (skills, energy, new technologies, infrastructures)

5. 2. Which role for cohesion policy?

6. 2. Crisis: which role for cohesion policy?
More than 1/3 EU budget and main common “lever” (no real common budgetary policy)
“Cohesion policy: investing in the real economy” (Dec. 08)
Accelerating the use of the funds
Re-directing towards areas with « immediate growth potential » (green revolution, energy)
Mobilise ESF to help unemployed back into jobs

7. 2. Acting at different levels
European
- Changes in Structural Funds Regulation
Working group on simplification (priority of CZ pres.) to present result in May
National, regional
- Member States invited to review Operational Programmes to focus on priorities

8. 2. Changes to the ESF regulation
Objectives:simplify management though less reimbursement on « real costs »:
Extend flat rate (e.g. fixed cost) to direct costs
Make possible lump sums (single) payment
Parliament and Council favourable, vote in April
Assessment: positive but should be accompanied by non legislative change too (co-, pre-financing, late payments)

9. 2. Changes to ERDF regulation
Objective:
Extend possibility to support energy efficiency in housing to old Member States
Focus on low income households
Negotiation: Council and Parliament backing but
- « low income households » => « for social cohesion »
limited to 4% ERDF
asking for further simplification of elegible costs (like ESF)

10. 2. General regulation (all funds)
Objective:
Facilitate pre-financing for Managing Authorities (2009)
Clarify eligible costs (overheads, in kind)
Boost « financial engineering instruments » and « major investments »
Negotiation: Council and Parliament support, vote in April
Assessment: positive but which impact for beneficiaries?

11. 3. Which EAPN response?

12. 3. EAPN answer to general EU recovery plan
November 2008 response highlights what we need :
Invest in consumer demand
Keep prices affordable (food, energy, housing)
Invest in decent jobs for those most in need
Need for specific objectives on tackling poverty
Redirect EU funds
Tackle indebtedness and support safe credit
Good governannce

13. 3. General assessment of EU proposals on structural funds
Changes to the regulation generally good:
- Welcome focus on simplification
- Positive focus on energy poverty
=> But need to be followed by change on the ground
But concerns on the broader approach:
- Is approach to employment the right one? (putting old and new poor back to back, “activation” but labour shortage)
- Will investment benefit the most disadvantaged?

14. 3. Proposal for an EAPN approach
Monitor and input in changes to the regulation
Ask for NGOs be involved in working group on simplification of the funds (finishing in May)
General EAPN position paper: Mobilising the funds as a social response to the crisis
=> But things won’t happen in Brussels: Inform your MAs!

15. 3. Questions for debate
Workshop discussion (45’):
Are structural funds modified as response to the crisis in your countries? How?
What are the opportunities and threats for our vision of cohesion policy? What do you think should be thematic priorities?
- Have you/your national network reacted? What should EAPN/National Networks do?