Committee on Regional Development Ordinary meeting
Legend
Transcript markers
- text Sentence being played
- text Search result
- text Intervention cited by the link you opened
Click a sentence to play the video from that moment. Select text to quote it with the speaker, timestamp and link.
More options
Offset
Transcript offset
Export
Replay
Versions of this video
Transcripts may differ slightly from one version to another.
REGI European Parliament
Follow its sittingsLeszek Włodarski
Jest to gmina miejsko-wiejska, natomiast największym producentem i pracodawcą w regionie, nie tylko oddziałującym na nasze miasto, ale również na całe województwo lubelskie, jest kopalnia węgla kamiennego Bogdanka. Możemy pochwalić się również dobrą lokalizacją w Polsce. To jest bliskie sąsiedztwo dużego miasta Lublin oraz odległość od lotniska. Jedna i druga odległość nie przekracza dwudziestu kilometrów. Od czterech lat na terenie Polski działa program sprawiedliwej transformacji, natomiast z przykrością muszę stwierdzić, że obejmuje on tylko pięć regionów w Polsce.
Mianowicie województwo śląskie, województwo dolnośląskie, województwo wielkopolskie, województwo małopolskie, województwo łódzkie. Wiąże się to oczywiście z eksploatacją węgla lub produkcją energii elektrycznej z węgla. Powiedziałem z przykrością, dlatego że nie wszystkie regiony w Polsce zostały funduszami sprawiedliwej transformacji objęte. Na kolejnym slajdzie widać te obszary i te regiony w Polsce, które są pozbawione wsparcia ze strony Funduszu Sprawiedliwej Transformacji. Jest to województwo lubelskie z producentem i pracodawcą, o którym wcześniej wspomniałem, jakim jest Lubelski Węgiel Bogdanka SA, województwo dolnośląskie, kopalnia Turów, województwo mazowieckie, elektrownia Kozienice i województwo świętokrzyskie, elektrownia Połaniec.
Mówię z przykrością, dlatego że w Polsce możemy odczuć wrażenie transformacji dwóch prędkości. Jedne regiony otrzymują od czterech lat wsparcie i jest to niemałe wsparcie wynoszące prawie cztery miliardy euro, natomiast pozostałe regiony są tego wsparcia w tej pierwszej perspektywie pozbawione. Natomiast koszty, które ponoszą i odprowadzają w postaci kosztów uprawnień do emisji dwutlenku węgla, są bardzo duże. Na trzydzieści pięć miliardów euro w ciągu ostatnich czterech lat kosztów uprawnień emisji CO2, trzydzieści osiem procent są to koszty, które ponoszą te rejony, które są pozbawione środków z Funduszu Sprawiedliwej Transformacji. Pozostałe dwadzieścia dwa miliardy euro są to inne podmioty.
Kopalnia węgla kamiennego Bogdanka SA jest największym pracodawcą w województwie lubelskim, ale jego oddziaływanie jest na cały region.
Mówimy tutaj o liczbie zatrudnionych pracowników wynoszącą 6000 osób, ale możemy mówić tutaj o znacznie większym zakresie pracowników, dlatego że kopalnia ma ogromne oddziaływanie na otoczenie w postaci funkcjonowania przemysłu chociażby transportowego, handlu i podobnych. Rozpoczęła wydobycie węgla od 1982 roku i wydobycie w 2025 roku wynosiło 7,6 milionów ton węgla. Maksymalnie Bogdanka uzyskiwała wydobycie na poziomie nawet 10 milionów ton. Jeżeli chodzi o zatrudnienie w kopalni, to tak jak powiedziałem, ogromne oddziaływanie na mój region powiatu łęczyńskiego, mojego miasta Łęczna. Z informacji o zatrudnieniu i danych statystycznych wychodzi, że ponad 19% osób zatrudnionych są to osoby pracujące na kopalni.
Jest to drugi najwyższy wynik w kraju zaraz po powiecie i miejscowości Jastrzębie-Zdrój i Jastrzębskiej Spółce Węglowej, czyli tak jak państwo widzą, osoby zatrudnione w kopalni to jest większość osób zatrudnionych w naszym powiecie. Niepokojące jest również zmniejszenie planu wydobycia tego węgla, bo tak jak wcześniej powiedziałem, obecnie w 25 roku było to 7 milionów ton, a już w 35 planuje się zaledwie dwa, niewiele więcej ponad 2 miliony ton węgla. Moje dzisiejsze wystąpienie to prośba o wsparcie i pomoc. Występuję nie po to, aby kwestionować europejską politykę klimatyczną, występuję, aby przypomnieć, że transformacja energetyczna będzie sprawiedliwa tylko wtedy, kiedy sprawiedliwa będzie również dla ludzi. Nie negujemy transformacji, rozumiemy konieczność ograniczenia emisji CO2, wiemy, że przyszłość Europy będzie oparta na nowoczesnej energetyce, ale równie dobrze wiemy, że żadna transformacja nie może polegać na pozostawieniu całych społeczności samych sobie.
Nie prosimy o specjalne traktowanie, nie prosimy o przywileje, prosimy jedynie o uczciwe warunki. Transformacja nie może oznaczać, że jedne regiony otrzymują miliardy euro na przygotowanie swojej przyszłości, a inne pozostają same z konsekwencjami zmian. Sprawiedliwość jest jedną z podstawowych wartości Unii Europejskiej. Dzisiaj prosimy, aby ta wartość została zastosowana również wobec mieszkańców Łęcznej i regionu lubelskiego. Historia Europy pokazuje, że zamknięcie dużego zakładu pracy bez stworzenia alternatywy prowadzi do bezrobocia, emigracji młodych ludzi, spadku dochodów samorządów oraz degradacji społecznej.
Nie chcemy powtórzyć błędów, a czujemy się regionem pominiętym. Nie przyjechałam jednak rozliczać przeszłości, przyjechałam rozmawiać o przyszłości. Potrzebujemy europejskiej solidarności, Europa wielokrotnie udowodniła, że potrafi pomagać regionom znajdującym się w trudnej sytuacji. Dzisiaj prosimy jedynie o równe traktowanie. Jeżeli Śląsk, Bełchatów, Wałbrzych, Wielkopolska Wschodnia otrzymała środki na przygotowanie swojej przyszłości, to również lubelskie zagłębie węglowe powinno taką szansę otrzymać.
Apelujemy o objęcie województwa lubelskiego nową edycją Funduszu Sprawiedliwej Transformacji po 2027 roku lub stworzenie dedykowanego programu dla regionów górniczych. Potrzebujemy możliwości finansowych na przygotowanie nowych terenów inwestycyjnych, przygotowanie strefy przemysłowo-technologicznej, przyciągnięcie producentów z sektorów elektromobilności, magazynów energii, przemysłu metalowego czy centrum szkoleniowego dla górników. Bo górnicy to doskonale wykwalifikowana kadra. Potrafią obsługiwać nowoczesne maszyny, znają automatykę, mechanikę i elektrykę. To kapitał, którego Europa nie może zmarnować.
Co chcemy, o co postulujemy?
Region Ruhry w Niemczech przeszedł transformację dzięki inwestycjom w naukę, nowe technologie i przedsiębiorczość. Wałbrzych odbudował swoją gospodarkę poprzez specjalną strefę ekonomiczną. Wielkopolska inwestuje w zieloną energię i nowe miejsca pracy. Łęczna również chce być przykładem sukcesu. Za kilka lat kopalnia będzie wydobywać mniej węgla i nie jest to pytanie czy, tylko jest to pytanie kiedy.
Od decyzji podejmowanych dzisiaj zależy, czy za 20 lat Łęczna stanie się rozwijającym się miastem europejskim, czy stanie się kolejnym symbolem niewykorzystanej szansy. Europa nie może dopuścić do tego, aby sprawiedliwa transformacja była sprawiedliwa tylko dla wybranych. Pomóżcie nam stworzyć nowe miejsca pracy, zanim znikną obecne. Pomóżcie nam zatrzymać młodych ludzi. Pomóżcie nam zbudować nową gospodarkę, bo najlepszy moment na transformację jest wtedy, gdy ludzie mają jeszcze pracę, a nie wtedy, kiedy już ją stracili.
Bardzo dziękuję za wysłuchanie.
Krzysztof Hetman
Thank you very much, Mr. Włodarski. Now we go to Mr. Colm Croffy, who represents EU Just Transition Fund Tourism Activator, Longford County Council, Ireland. The floor is yours.
Colm Croffy
Thank you, Chairman Heitman, and indeed thanks to all the distinguished members of the committee for the invitation extended to me on behalf of my colleagues. I want to use this time, if I may, to focus, I hope the presentation arrives, on the tourism element of our scheme in Ireland. Do I have to drive it this way, do I? He started. Oh yes.
We should be seeing it there, should we? We were fortunate in our country to use tourism as one of the economic drivers to replace and to build a new economy in the area of the Midlands, which was most grievously affected by the change from the old technology economy to the new. So, thank you. And this is next. Okay.
That's the right one. Okay. I'm learning about technology here. It doesn't work? It's been that sort of a morning, Chairman.
Ah, there we are. So, the European Just Transition Fund in Ireland 21 to 27 is looking at supporting the regions and communities that are most negatively affected by the transition to climate neutrality, ensuring, I suppose, that nobody is left behind. The regions where we have had the direct, most direct impacts from the move away from peat production, in my colleague's previous presentation it was coal and steel, in Ireland it was peat production from the boglands and electricity generation from that peat. Ireland will receive up to 84.5 million from the fund over the period to 27, with the Government of Ireland's match funding using exchequer resources of up to 169 million is available. In 2023, 66 million of this was awarded to Fáilte Ireland, our tourism board, to deliver a regenerative tourism and placemaking scheme in the region.
And there we go.
So just to give you an idea of the core counties affected, they lie in the middle of the island, an area not known for its beaches and for its beauty and for holidaymaking. So tourism would be a very least economic activity across the area. So the regenerative tourism and placemaking scheme, of which I am one of eight EU just tourism activators, is across these eight counties and we're looking at a number of actions. The first action was to foster economic diversification of the territory by supporting some productive investments in micro-enterprises, SMEs and economic stakeholders in the key sectors. About 38 million was invested in this.
The second action was to support the regeneration, repurposing of former industrial peatlands and related lands through walks and trails. That investment package was about 30 million. And the specific schemes, I suppose, that I'm involved in... Mea culpa. I'm galloping.
My apologies, Mr. Chair. I will slow down. So the EU just fund regeneration tourism and placemaking scheme is the scheme I want to talk about most specifically. These are the trails across the center of the country that were invested in, walks and trails across the peatlands. And you can see from the second screen, the second map, of all the area of activities and micro-enterprises that the just fund has allowed us to invest in in generating visitor facilities and tourism activities for new economic opportunities in the area.
So in looking at what was successful, we have some 85 projects in private and community SMEs. We have some 27 projects with strategic partners. And we have some three trail projects. We have over 60 digital transformation projects occurring at the moment. And we have over 82 businesses in our tourism learning network.
And as I mentioned earlier, we have our eight appointed tourism activators who operate as field officers working with community groups, small enterprises and new families and new business people who are involving and investing in tourism for the first time. So of the 151 odd projects, 44 are in sustainable visitor experiences. Some 27 are in new sustainable tourism accommodation. Some five were in planning and design. 66 were in digital transformation.
And nine were involved directly with accessibility enhancements for existing visitor facilities, giving us a total of 151. In looking at the number of jobs that this investment is going to create, we're forecasting about 170 full-time jobs and 380 part-time direct jobs. We suspect that between 250 and 700 will be the total indirect jobs across the wider regional economy based on Irish tourism employment benchmarks and regional multiplier assumptions.
So the central direct employment estimate will be in the region of 276 jobs, equating to 12 and a half million in annual tourism expenditure or income rather supported. I'm not going to go through this in detail, chair, but just to give you a little flavor of some of the tourism packages that we can now offer to international visitors, to regional visitors, domestic visitors, families across the region that we were not in a position to bundle and offer prior to the fund operating in our in our area. Athlone is a principal town in the Midlands. The River Shannon is the longest, second longest river in the Hibernian archipelago and is used widely for leisure and and recreational purposes. And we've increased the fleet a little bit.
We've increased a lot of the facilities on it. And we're trying to get people to use more of the natural landscape and waterways and features in these tour packages and offerings. So in looking at the impact on the region for us at the moment, it has provided the fund and the scheme has provided confidence in tourism as an economic driver. Traditionally up to this point on our island, tourism was typically a big city and a coastal activity. It was never a Midland activity.
This scheme and this investment has given those who are on the ground in private industry, in private business and in the public supports a newfound confidence in in tourism. It's also been a significant catalyst for destination development, for improving how towns, villages and settlements and landscapes are being viewed, canalways, boglands, peatlands, wildlife habitats significantly. It also I suppose has highlighted the appetite amongst a lot of our small medium enterprises to create tourism projects. It also has showcased the significant positive force of collaboration across our traditional county approach, which sometimes prior to this in the Midlands was not as evident as it is now. Obviously it provides our international and domestic visitors with more things to do and see and experience.
And it showcases the ancient of the landscape and the modern history of the industrialized landscape as well as the landscape and habitat itself. I'm just going to in terms of reasons to continue, I could sit here all day and give you a number of them, but I've pinpointed this. Long-term capacity building takes longer than one funding cycle. Tourism clusters and networks that we are building require ongoing coordination. The funded projects need implementation support to succeed.
And all the contracts that the individual promoters are assigned are for 10 years of invigilation by the commission. The activators have been providing essential local expertise and stakeholder engagement. And long-term economic diversification requires longer-term tourism product development support. And I'm winding down now, chair. I know I have about 60 seconds left.
I just want to share with you in the town of Lanesborough and Ballyleague, there were about 1100 direct people employed between the Electricity Supply Board and the Peatland Harvesting Company. They all lost their jobs in the transformation. One of them, a former ESB manager, John Sorohan, was a successful applicant to the scheme. And he now runs a very successful visitor business where he offers walks and guided trail walks in his native town. And he also has one of the newest solar-powered vessels operating on my favorite Lough, Lough Ree, and is doing very successfully with it in creating a newfound Riviera in one of Ireland's oldest Lough in the heart of Longford and the heart of the hidden heartlands.
Our plea here, chair, is that your committee would recommend that from a tourism point of view and for the economic development of our Midlands, the scheme continues. Thank you, sir.
Krzysztof Hetman
Thank you very much, Mr. Croffy. The time is absolutely ideal. Okay, now I open the floor for questions, for remarks from our members.
First one will be Mr. Goncalves. No? Okay. Ms. Repp.
Sabrina Repp
Great. Thank you very much. Thank you Chairman. I will speak in German. Vielen Dank an die beiden Redner, die uns hier schon einen ganz guten Einblick über den Just Transition vorgegeben haben.
Ich habe einige Fragen an Herrn Woldarski, weil ich tatsächlich letztes Jahr mit meinen Kollegen auch das Vergnügen hatte, in Polen unterwegs zu sein. Und für mich war das sehr bewegend, gerade im Osten Polens unterwegs zu sein und da sehr viele Eindrücke auch zu sammeln. Und Sie haben aus meiner Sicht sehr wichtige Punkte angesprochen, über die Sie sich auch Gedanken machen. Wie schaffen wir es eigentlich, die Transformation, die Umbrüche, die jetzt beginnen, so in einen Einklang zu bringen, dass wir die Menschen vor Ort mitnehmen können? Und zwar so, dass wir eben nicht Populisten den Aufwind gewinnen, die uns weißmachen wollen, dass es einen Stoppknopf gibt, den man drücken kann und alles bleibt so wie es ist.
Also müssen wir in politischer Verantwortung diese Prozesse sehr gut organisieren. Und meine erste Frage ist einmal, wie aus Ihrer Sicht dieser Einklang gut funktionieren kann. Also wie kann die Europäische Union Sie dabei unterstützen, dass wir auf der einen Seite in der Transformation vorankommen, aber auf der anderen Seite die Leute dabei auch mitnehmen können? Dann ist für mich sehr wichtig und der Just Transition Fond ist eigentlich der Inbegriff dessen, was wir auf europäischer Ebene lange Zeit auch voranbringen wollen, nämlich eine proaktive Kohäsionspolitik, nicht nur eine reaktive. Das heißt, dann mit europäischen Fördermitteln einzugreifen, wenn wir schon die zahlreichen Herausforderungen und Probleme in den Regionen haben.
Und da würde mich aber interessieren, denn wenn wir uns jetzt den künftigen mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen ansehen, dann ist die Frage von dem Transition Fond eine eher untergeordnete. Denn so wie wir den Fond kennen, den wird es ihn nicht mehr geben. Und mich würde einmal interessieren ganz konkret, welche Auswirkungen das auch für Sie in der Region hätte, weil Sie natürlich auch davon geredet haben, dass man diesen Fond und diese Mittel in Form einer proaktiven Kohäsionspolitik eigentlich ausweiten müsste und nicht kürzen müsste und nicht den Fokus auf vielleicht andere Mittel setzen würde. Also wie blicken Sie da tatsächlich drauf? Und was mir sehr im Kopf geblieben ist, als ich in Lublin unterwegs war, war ein Transportunternehmen.
Weil wir sehen natürlich, dass insbesondere die östlichen Regionen in Polen auch durch den russischen Angriff auf die Ukraine auch noch mal vor anderen Herausforderungen stehen und gerade auch in dem Bezug auf die Transformation einige Prozesse in den Regionen beschleunigt hat, wo man vielleicht vorher gesagt hätte, dass das vielleicht in 20, 30 Jahren auf uns zukommt, dass wir da etwas verändern müssen. Aber durch den russischen Angriff und auch durch die Maßnahmen, die wir auf europäischer Ebene beschließen, die richtig sind, doch vor einigen Herausforderungen gestellt wird. Und da würde mich interessieren, wie können wir auch als Europäische Union Sie dabei unterstützen, diese auch teilweise beschleunigten Transformationsherausforderungen gerade im östlichen Polen noch besser anzugehen und noch besser zu unterstützen? Vielen Dank, dass Sie heute hier sind.
Pascal Arimont
Ja, vielen Dank. Ich werde auch auf Deutsch sprechen. Vielen Dank für das sehr interessante oder die sehr interessanten Darstellungen, inwiefern dieser Just Transition Fund für Ihr Land wichtig ist.
Wer die Leute kennt, die Kohle abbauen, der weiß, dass das Leute mit einem hohen Maß an Professionalität und auch Stolz sind. Sind Leute, die mit sehr viel Würde und sehr viel Stolz diesem Beruf nachgehen, wohlwissend, und das ist vielleicht das Entscheidende, wohlwissend, dass Kohle in gleich welcher Form irgendwann nicht mehr abgebaut werden wird, weil die Zukunft, und das glaube ich, hat der Markt schon entschieden, elektrisch sein wird, also mit Strom betrieben sein wird. Und all die Regionen, die in Europa noch Kohle abbauen, kennen diese Auslaufpläne und müssen sich darauf einstellen. Das ist verdammt schwer, würde ich es mal so nennen, für die Leute, die in diesen Bereichen arbeiten. Das ist verdammt schwer für die Regionen, die davon leben, deren Wohlstand davon definiert worden ist und die jetzt vor einer eher unsicheren Zukunft stehen, insofern diese Zukunft nicht geplant ist.
Und ich kenne die Kohlegebiete aus meinem Land in Belgien, da hat es diesen Ausstieg aus Kohleförderung vor Jahren beziehungsweise Jahrzehnten gegeben. Man hat versucht, aus diesen Gebieten andere industrielle Standorte zu bauen, zu bilden, zu definieren. Ähnliches läuft in meinem Nachbarland Deutschland, das ist dort auch sehr gut zu sehen. Das sind wirkliche Einschnitte in die Lebenserfahrungen dieser Menschen und wir sollten ihnen dabei helfen, eine Perspektive zu behalten, auch für ihre Kinder in einer Gegend wohnen zu bleiben, die ihnen eine Perspektive bietet. Und da ist das Zauberwort langfristiges perspektivisches Planen wichtig.
Da braucht es Geld zu und der Just Transition Fund war einer dieser Quellen, die Regionen wie Ihre anzapfen können, um eben diese Transition, dieses sich Weiterentwickeln einer Region weg von dieser Kohle hin zu etwas Neuem, was noch nicht definiert ist, zu bewerkstelligen. Ich bin zurzeit auch der Berichterstatter für den EFRE. Und in diesem EFRE befindet sich, so wie die Kommission das vorgestellt hat, dieser Just Transition Fund nicht mehr. Also muss jedes Land selbst, und das ist die Idee dahinter, jedes Land selbst definieren, ob es in seinem nationalen Plan Geld für diese Just Transition vorsehen möchte oder nicht. Das ist natürlich eine für Ihre Region vielleicht etwas schwierigere Situation, weil Sie nicht mehr garantiert haben, dass Ihr Land Geld für diesen Just Transition dort vorsehen wird.
Und jetzt kommt meine Frage, die sehr direkt ist und die auch aus der Diskussion herrührt, die wir gestern hier hatten, als ich den Bericht vorgestellt habe. Die Kommission sieht vor, dass es nationale Pläne gibt, in denen an sich Regionen, so wie das in Polen an sich der Fall ist mit den operationellen Programmen für den EFRE, dass die Regionen dort weniger zu sagen haben und weniger Einfluss auf diesen nationalen Plan haben sollen, als das vorher der Fall war. Würde es Ihnen helfen, wenn am Ende des legislativen Prozesses zum EFRE dabei herauskäme, dass Ihre Region ein sehr deutliches Mitspracherecht auf die Vergabe der Mittel, die Ihrem Land zur Verfügung stehen werden, hätte?
Sprich, würde es Ihnen helfen, wenn Ihre Region am Ende des Prozesses diesen Plan selbst erstellen kann, mit der Kommission selbst verhandeln kann, um eben diese Just Transition in Ihren Plan mit aufzunehmen, einzubauen, um den Leuten vor Ort diese Gewähr zu geben, dass man sich um sie kümmert und dass das nicht das Geld, was Ihr Land von der EU kriegt, in andere Dinge in dem Sinne verwendet wird, die mit Ihrem sehr praktischen, sehr sehr konkreten Problem nicht zu tun haben wird. Also die direkte Frage: Würden Sie sich wünschen, dass Sie an diesen Plänen mitarbeiten dürfen und auch die Gewähr haben, dass Sie am Ende mitentscheiden dürfen? Vielen Dank.
Sakis Arnaoutoglou
Καλημέρα σας. Ήθελα να απευθύνω μία ερώτηση, I'm going to speak in Greek, στον κύριο Κρόφι. Καταρχάς ευχαριστούμε πάρα πολύ για την παρουσίαση, την πολύ σημαντική. Έχουμε και εμείς προβλήματα στην Ελλάδα ανάλογα και κυρίως σε περιοχές όπου ο λιγνίτης, η εξόρυξη του λιγνίτη ήταν η κύρια στην ουσία οικονομική δραστηριότητα ανθρώπων και υπήρχε πολύς κόσμος, πολύς κόσμος ο οποίος ζούσε, αλλά τώρα φεύγει διότι δεν υπάρχει κάποια εναλλακτική. Από την εμπειρία σας, ποιο ήταν το πιο δύσκολο μέρος της μετάβασης στην Ιρλανδία;
Η εξασφάλιση των πόρων, η κινητοποίηση των τοπικών κοινωνιών και των επιχειρήσεων ή η δημιουργία πραγματικών και μόνιμων θέσεων εργασίας; Και ποιο στοιχείο του ιρλανδικού μοντέλου θεωρείτε ότι θα μπορούσε να εφαρμοστεί πιο άμεσα στις λιγνιτικές περιοχές της Ελλάδας, όπως η Δυτική Μακεδονία και η Μεγαλόπολη; Διότι έχουμε πολλά κοινά, αλλά βλέπω ότι εσείς καταφέρατε πράγματα τα οποία η ελληνική κυβέρνηση μάλλον ακόμα βρίσκεται στο στη φάση ονείρου. Ευχαριστώ.
Ciaran Mullooly
Thank you, Chair, and thank you to our panel for your comments this morning. It's been most informative to see what's going on across Europe with regard to the European Union Just Transition Fund. Chair, I want to compliment yourself for your initial comments because you were quite showed your own deep knowledge of the situation when you spoke at the beginning about the need for care first to be careful that the transformation was not too fast. That was your focus this morning and you're quite right and that was a specific problem with regard to my constituency of Ireland where due to a legal matter the closure of power stations was expedited and we did not have a period to prepare for just transition. In effect, there was no just transition.
I'm more than familiar with what has happened in Poland in the course of my work as on an INI file in this house. I traveled to the Silesian region and looked at the power stations, met visited the power stations, went down under, met the workers and talked to them about the the problem. I know there is a relationship with the employers and the workers, an agreement which has been in place, but there's also a great deal of insecurity in that region and I know why you your comments bear why your comments are based today with regard to the future of young people in particular. Mr. Coffey and I are are known to each other. In a previous life, I I worked in his position with Longford County Council, so I've been on the ground as well.
So I'll begin with the positive my positive comments with regard to the Just Transition Fund in Ireland. The project insofar as it worked in the area of sustainable tourism has been relatively successful. Mr. Coffey pointed out the area of employment, the creation of those 170 full-time, 380 part-time and the projection with regard to the indirect employment levels in the area as well.
And that is indeed welcome. I am familiar with some of the projects because I worked on them myself and I'm very proud of the work I did with them. I'm delighted to see them opening and I'm delighted to see employment being created. The problem, Chair, is not enough. As Mr. Coffey pointed out, in the entire area 170 full-time jobs, in my hometown 1,100 jobs were once created, and that's just one town in the region.
So it's just not sufficient. And the result of it today, I'm afraid, is a failure to provide employment for local people. In Ireland, we have a new phenomenon in rural towns around the country. When you travel across the country from the Midlands region in particular, you come across car parks where there were never car parks before, Chair. And what I mean is these are areas along the public roads close to small villages where young people who were traditionally employed in that region previously now assemble in the morning, park their car and get into a bus or a minibus and travel two hours away to the city of Dublin or to a major population center.
They cannot be employed locally anymore. And you, Chair, will know this yourself. And this is regrettable. It has severe implications for depopulation and demographics in our region. This is not sustainable for people to get up at 4:00 AM or 5:00 AM in the morning and travel such a distance and return at 9:00 at night.
It is not sustainable from a family perspective and that is the biggest problem with regard to Just Transition. Employment figures in Poland and in Ireland have not gone up dramatically, but it's displacement of employment. That's what's going on here. And it's a major issue and it's ultimately the failure, the biggest failure of the Just Transition scheme is to deal with this. Article 1.1 was to look at SMEs and micro-enterprises and otherwise.
From my perspective, it has failed to deal with significant projects in that area for a number of reasons. The time limitations were part of it. But the regional assemblies and people like Pobal in Ireland, the government departments involved, Fáilte Ireland, have a responsibility now to evaluate how we can do better in the future because I believe there is a future for this. I believe going forward we must ensure that there is a future fund to support this issue. I share the disappointment that there's been no reference to EU Just Transition Fund within the MFF.
But I've moved on from that issue and I've spoken to Executive Vice-President Šefčovič and others and I've tried to at least make the case that we should most certainly ring-fence funding in another area for regions of Just Transition. And I think there is a belief out there that this can be done. In the last couple of days through our work on the REGI Committee, I've included some amendments so that alongside my colleagues here we can find a new place within the funds. I've targeted the European Social Fund as it happens. ERDF is there, there are many other areas.
I think there is an important emphasis on us as a committee to ensure we can ring-fence this funding coming from Europe for these regions going forward. And that is most important. I say to questions, a couple of questions to the panel, and I suppose it's important from their point of view from a Polish perspective. You still have a period of Just Transition to proceed. The last power station is not due to close until 2047, I think it's Silesia, the region I went to.
So you still have some time. So if there is no Just Transition Fund in your region in 2028, 2029, 2030, where will the funds come to to retrain, reskill or create employment in those regions? You know, where will those funds come from? And to Mr. Coffey, I put the question, I suppose, within the context of your employment. There are six or seven people working in the area of activator projects.
I understand in an Irish context they are to be made redundant at Christmas of this year, which in itself is an indictment of the scheme that we can have a situation whereby the people involved in the Just Transition Fund who are supposed to be protecting people and helping people who have lost their jobs, these people themselves are losing their jobs. This is crazy. Where is the foresight with regard to ensuring this scheme is successful? We're laying off the people who are supposed to be looking after the people who are being laid off.
It's appalling. The Irish government particularly as it holds the presidency must address this issue and I'm wondering if Mr. Craffey has any thoughts with regard to how the role of that activator could be expanded to take in the greater employment and social needs of the community. Thank you very much.
Krzysztof Hetman
Thank you very much colleagues. Now I give, I'll give the floor to head of unit in DG REGIO, Ms. Eva Nussmueller, European Commission of course. Please, the floor is yours.
Eva Nussmueller
Thank you very much. Just hang on a second so I'm opening the right document. All right, thank you very much for your patience. Dear chair, dear panel, dear members of parliament, thank you very much for this public debate today. Thank you very much for your presentations, extremely interesting.
It shows how diverse the Just Transition Fund is, well how diverse the regions are, how diverse we're addressing problems and how diverse the solutions are as well. I assume that you would also then reply to the questions asked. I think there were many very, very relevant questions that were asked from the MEPs as well. But from our perspective, from the Commission perspective on how the Just Transition Fund is implemented until now, what are the lessons learned? Well, this is for us very much not just a fund, not just a financial instrument, but a, the, if you want, place, the most place-based development strategy that we have within cohesion policy.
We see that the fact that it is so focused territorially, that it provides such a strong vision and a strategy how to deal with this, we think that this is really one instrument that reinforces the principles of cohesion policy to find solutions on the spot for the people and with the people. So we think that this is actually quite a successful instrument until now, particularly, and I want to emphasize this, on the governance side of it. The governance side of it means that with the Just Transition Fund we're asking regions to upfront do a lot of homework. And this was also a lot of, well, a lot of homework for the regions to be done in addition to what they had to do already. But this homework to define ahead of the funding, where do we actually want to go, with what vision and with what objective and with what milestones do we want to change our region and give it a new vision, a new purpose.
And this is not, this is not trivial. It wasn't a trivial work within the regions. We did this in strong cooperation with our country desks as well.
But this, this gave a new, a new idea to a region in transition. And I think this is a, this is a strong and important element of the Just Transition Fund, these territorial just transition strategies that were designed up front. You said a couple of times in the presentations already, but also in the questions afterwards, how important it is to do this with the people and for the people. There as well, in the Just Transition Fund, possibly more than in the other cohesion policy investments, we have an even stronger partnership principle. As you know, the partnership principle is enshrined in cohesion policy, but in the Just Transition Fund, this is even strengthened.
It's strengthened because these territorial just transition plans have to be done with the local stakeholders. The, I think it was mentioned before already as well, this acceptance of the transition and the development of an own vision for the region, this was done with the people, with the stakeholders on the ground. And I very much agree that the transition, for it to be sustainable and effective, it needs to be done like that. You need to do a, if a transition is as significant as for some of these regions this transition is, it needs to be done with the people. And we think that looking at the implementation of the Just Transition Fund, this is maybe the second most important element.
So the governance in terms of defining a strong vision and defining a strong strategy, but also doing this and defining this with the people on the ground, two major elements of the Just Transition Fund. Another one is that obviously, and it was also mentioned, this is not just about transitioning out of somewhere, but it is, or something, it is to transition towards something. So this strong focus on economic diversification, the biggest, the biggest amounts of the funds were budgeted in your regions on SME support, on developing new economic opportunities in the regions, of creating new jobs. But also very much on this people side. And MEP Mullany mentioned it as well, mentioned the ESF as well.
Also within the Just Transition Fund, already we have already until now 27,000 people who have obtained new qualifications. This is a strong, strong focus of the JTF, upskilling, reskilling, seeing that the people in the region can with new, with a new skill set address this transition in a positive way. There were a lot of comments on the future, but then we have a second session. So I'll keep I think my points that I wanted to make for the future for then in half an hour, 45 minutes when I'll have the chance to intervene again. Thank you very much.
Leszek Włodarski
Thank you very much, Mr. Director. Now I'll give the floor back to the experts for remarks. Please, Mr. Budarski will be first.
Bardzo serdecznie dziękuję państwu za te pytania. Postaram się odpowiedzieć, zwłaszcza że mam wrażenie, że te pytania zadawane przez tak zacne grono, one sprowadzają się do jednego celu jak gdyby mojego spotkania i mojej wypowiedzi. Zacznę od samej społeczności górniczej. Tak jak słusznie pan to zauważył, górnicy bardzo doceniają swój zawód.
mi z Śląska na naszą Lubelszczyznę. Ale muszę państwu powiedzieć informację, która również mnie pozytywnie zaskoczyła. W tym roku były przeprowadzone głębokie badania na grupie osób pracowników kopalni Lubelski Węgiel Bogdanka S.A. Były to badania anonimowe, więc wierzę, że bardzo szczere padały odpowiedzi ze strony pracowników, od pracowników różnego szczebla. I pracownicy kopalni, górnicy mają świadomość transformacji energetycznej.
Oni wiedzą, że wydobycie węgla będzie stopniowo malało, aż w ostateczności, oby ta data była jak najpóźniejsza, tego wydobycia być może na terenie Bogdanki już nie będzie. Muszę państwu powiedzieć, że nasza kopalnia ma zagwarantowane wydobycie do roku 2049, tylko pytanie, czy faktycznie cały czas ta ilość wydobywanego węgla będzie na takim samym poziomie jak jest obecnie, czyli zbliżonym do 8 milionów ton rocznie. My już wiemy ze strategii właściciela, że tego węgla będzie potrzeba znacznie mniej. Tu pada już w dokumentach strategicznych liczba niewiele ponad 2 miliony ton do roku 2035. A dlaczego?
Dlatego, że głównym odbiorcą węgla z terenu Bogdanki są elektrownie Kozienice i Połaniec, które no też przechodzą transformację i bloki węglowe będą zastępowane blokami gazowymi. Dlatego ta data 2049 jest datą nierealistyczną. My musimy myśleć o dacie wcześniejszej, czyli podejmować działania znacznie szybciej. I tak jak powiedziałem, że górnicy liczą się z powolną, stopniową transformacją energetyczną, tak również mają oczekiwania. Oczekiwania na stworzenie w regionie, w województwie lubelskim, w powiecie łęczyńskim równie atrakcyjnych miejsc pracy, bo myślę, że również nie jest to zaskoczeniem dla wszystkich państwa, górnicy cenią swój zawód z trzech powodów: wysokie wynagrodzenie, również możliwość wcześniejszego odejścia na emeryturę, jest to ciężka praca i myślę, że to jest takie zadośćuczynienie za ich trud włożony w pracę, oraz dobre zaplecze socjalne.
I w tych wypowiedziach anonimowych bardzo często pojawia się informacja, że jeżeli region również zagwarantuje, utworzy równe miejsca pracy o podobnych warunkach płacowych i socjalnych, a bezpieczniejsze, no bo praca pod ziemią, kilometr pod ziemią, możemy sobie wyobrazić, jest to praca ciężka i niebezpieczna, to są w stanie z tą sytuacją się pogodzić. Myślę, że ich myślenie już nie jest o nich, bo myślę, że większość pracowników dotrze do wieku emerytalnego, uda im się przepracować w kopalni, ale jest to myślenie o swoich dzieciach, wnukach. I nasze działania są ukierunkowane na to, aby nie czekać do tej ostatecznej daty, kiedy tych miejsc z roku na rok będzie coraz mniej, tylko zacząć już działać. I muszę państwu powiedzieć, że podobny apel, podobne prośby, które skierowałem dzisiaj do Komisji Europejskiej, również my wspólnie ze związkami zawodowymi, samorządowcami, z działaczami z naszego regionu kierujemy do naszego polskiego rządu, również z apelem o ukierunkowanie, o strumień środków właśnie na ten region lubelskiego zagłębia węglowego. Jakie to są działania?
Są to działania mające na celu utworzenie nowych miejsc pracy.
My mamy ogromne obszary na terenie kopalni Bogdanka, które możemy wykorzystać na przyciągnięcie nowych przedsiębiorców. Mamy potężne tereny wysokości około 200 hektarów, które są własnością rządu krajowego zasobu rolnictwa, które również w przyszłości mogłyby być zagospodarowane i przyciągnąć nowych przedsiębiorców, nowe miejsca pracy. Pomimo tego, że bardzo często Polska Wschodnia oceniana jest tak, że jest tam mało inwestycji i przedsiębiorcy nie chcą w ten teren inwestować, to chcę to zdementować. Przedsiębiorcy na naszym terenie szukają terenów inwestycyjnych, tylko bardzo często nie możemy im niczego zaoferować, bo te tereny nie są jeszcze gotowe, nie są uzbrojone, nie mają doprowadzonych mediów. To są tereny, które wymagają niwelacji, przygotowane pod przyszłego przedsiębiorcę.
My ten proces zaczęliśmy już kilka lat temu, on wiąże się również z koniecznością zmian planu zagospodarowania, doprowadzeniem energii elektrycznej, ale niestety są to procesy długotrwałe i niezwykle kosztowne. I my bez dodatkowego wsparcia pewnie te procesy przeprowadzimy, tylko one będą trwały znacznie dłużej i być może za długo i ten czas odejścia od węgla i zmniejszenie wydobycia niestety nas wyprzedzi w tych działaniach. Kolejna sprawa, o tym, o czym pani tutaj wspomniała, tak, za swoją granicą mamy wojnę. Natomiast wierzymy no w szybki i pomyślny koniec tych działań wojennych i wówczas myślę, że ta nasza ściana wschodnia w Polsce mogłaby być również atrakcyjna dla przyszłych przedsiębiorców mających na celu odbudowę Ukrainy. Więc na te działania chcemy się przygotować.
Tak jak wspomniała tutaj również pani z sali, to jest przygotowanie terenów, ale również przygotowanie pracowników, przekwalifikowanie, wyszkolenie, współpraca z uczelniami wyższymi, wykorzystanie potencjału pracowników kopalni, bo to są wyspecjalizowani specjaliści, którzy niekoniecznie swoją pracę muszą realizować na kopalni związaną z wydobyciem węgla, ale również w innych gałęziach przemysłowych. Dziękuję.
Colm Croffy
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think it was our MEP from Greece, Mr. Arantolo, who asked me to address some concerns as to what aspects of the Irish model could be applicable in the lignite mining production area of his beautiful country. He questioned about the difficulty in securing the funds. I think the best answer there is that if the mobilization of interest is is done well, and in fairness to my predecessor and to my other colleagues, the Irish scheme, it had a very, very intensive process with communities at ground level before the forms arrived to encourage people to think about alternative businesses in their farms, connect with their households, in their villages, to see things differently. And that involved a lot of of activity at a community level.
He also questioned about the creation of permanent jobs. I think the simplest way is the better defined the business model for each individual microprise enterprise is with a good feasibility study on it, the better the the better the outcome would be for long-term job provision. But that also requires, which knits into MEP Malooly's question about the continuation of the activators or the people at the ground level, the field officers who were stoking this process to get the forms in on time, to support the applicants in their step journey through drawdown and through implementing their their installation of the business.
Without those people in the field, it's going to be very, very difficult to maintain job creation. And I think it is deplorable that in four or five months' time, the eight posts in the field in Ireland will cease. There are some 40 projects that will not be operational at the 30th of December. There are some 30 deadlines, or sorry, some 30 extensions to a timeline have been given. And all the contracts with these good people are for 10 years.
And there's nobody in the field now going to be able to assist them to do that. So perhaps, Kieran, it's an issue for EMRA, the Local Authority Association, and the different partners to the process in an Irish situation that can address that capacity difficulty, which is going to, I think, fundamentally unfurl all the good work that has been achieved. And I hope my Greek colleague is comfortable. The Irish model, I think, is very applicable to all regions in distress within the EU. Thank you, Chair.
Krzysztof Hetman
Thank you very much for our two experts. And we continue with our second panel, strengthening the Just Transition Fund and ensuring continuity beyond 2027. I'd like to welcome very warmly the next two our experts. The first will be Mr. Thies Schröder, who is director of Ferropolis and project manager of Forum Rathenau, Germany. Mr. Schröder, the floor is yours.
Thies Schröder
Herzlichen Dank, Herr Benifei, herzlichen Dank für die Einladung hier in den REGI-Ausschuss. Wir gehen erdgeschichtlich jetzt ein paar nicht nur Jahrzehnte, sondern Jahrtausende zurück. Wir waren im Torf bei Herrn Croffy. Wir waren in der Steinkohle, die noch weiter zurückliegt bei Herrn Rodaski. Jetzt sind wir in der Braunkohle.
Und in Sachsen-Anhalt, im mitteldeutschen Revier, hat man nicht nur in diesem mitteldeutschen Revier, sondern auch in den anderen Braunkohleregionen Deutschlands, auch in den Steinkohleregionen, in einem gesellschaftlichen Beschluss 2019 bereits auf nationaler Ebene den Ausstieg aus der Kohle festgelegt. Und wichtig war, und das hilft uns auch in der Beurteilung des Just Transition Funds, dass dieser Beschluss nicht von einem Parlament oder von einem Ministerium getragen wurde, sondern von einer breiten gesellschaftlichen Kommission, in der Wissenschaft vertreten war, Wirtschaft vertreten war, natürlich Politik, aber auch Zivilgesellschaft, Vereine. Seitdem wird dieser Weg des Kohleausstiegs durchaus umstritten, aber er wird konsequent umgesetzt und die gesellschaftlichen Verwerfungen waren bisher geringer als befürchtet. Allerdings sehen wir nun angesichts der bevorstehenden Landtagswahl in Sachsen-Anhalt, dass die Transformation, wir rechnen da mit einer oder wir können nicht ausschließen, dass es eine Mehrheit für eine rechtsextreme verfassungsfeindliche Partei gibt, zeigen, dass wir bei weitem noch nicht das Vertrauen in die Transformation erreicht haben, das wir mit der Arbeit beispielsweise der Kohlekommission, aber auch solchen europäischen Programmen wie des JTF versuchen zu erreichen. Es gibt immer noch eine möglicherweise Mehrheit für eine gute alte Zeit, in der man hofft, stehen bleiben zu können.
Wir wissen alle, dass der Weg in das postfossile Zeitalter unumkehrbar ist, aber er bringt eben doch noch einige Herausforderungen mit sich.
Wir haben in diesem Spannungsfeld aus beschlossenem Kohleausstieg und Herausforderungen in der Akzeptanz dieses Transformationsweges 2020 das Forum Rathenau gegründet, was ganz bewusst als Mittler zwischen Gesellschaft und Wissenschaft, zwischen Politik, Wirtschaft, Verwaltung, Bürgerinnen und Bürgern existiert, also eine zivilgesellschaftliche Institution, die den Vorteil hat, dass sie an manchen Stellen schneller agieren und auch reagieren kann als viele tradierte Einrichtungen. Das Forum Rathenau wird nicht über JTF gefördert, sondern aus dem Bundesprogramm STARK, also Strukturwandel auf Grundlage der Beschlüsse der Kohlekommission. Und wir sind, damit Sie eine ungefähre Vorstellung haben, ein Team von ca. 15 Personen im Osten Deutschlands in Bitterfeld-Wolfen, mitten in der Kohle- und vor allem Chemieregion, denn der Kohleausstieg ist kein isolierter Prozess, sondern er hat erhebliche Auswirkungen auf das gesamte Energie- und Wirtschaftssystem und bei uns im Revier ganz speziell auch auf die Zukunft der Chemieindustrie. Wir arbeiten auf mehreren Ebenen. Ganz bewusst verbinden wir das Thema Bildung in unserem Schülerlabor.
Wir verbinden Startup-Förderung nach einem Market-Pull-Ansatz. Wir begleiten die großen Industriebetriebe in einem Netzwerk namens Chemie+. Und wir haben eigene Kommunikationskanäle, unseren Carbon Cycle Culture Club entwickelt, wo wir ganz bewusst natürlich auch zurückschauen, aber vor allem über die Zukunft diskutieren, eine Anspielung an unseren Gründungsvater, also unseren Namensgeber Walther Rathenau, AEG-Gründer vor mehr als 100 Jahren, der ein wunderbares Buch namens "Von kommenden Dingen" geschrieben hat, was uns zeigt, dass die Transformation nicht erst in den 1990er, 2000er Jahren einsetzte, sondern das gesamte moderne Zeitalter ein Transformationszeitalter ist. 2025 allerdings sind wir selbst zum Nutzer des JTF geworden, indem wir mit vielen Partnern zusammen, mit Universitäten, der Kommune, mit einer Kunsthochschule, einem Verein, mit der Stiftung Bauhaus Dessau eine Initiative gestartet haben im Süden Sachsen-Anhalts in einer kleinen Stadt namens Zeitz, nach den Richtlinien des oder nicht nach den Richtlinien, nach der Idee des Neuen Europäischen Bauhauses, also Beautiful, Sustainable, Together, einen multidisziplinären Ansatz der Transformation, einen Demonstrator zu entwickeln für zirkuläres, klimaneutrales und ästhetisch vorbildliches Bauen. Diese ehemalige Kinderwagenfabrik in Zeitz war der identitätsstiftende Ort in einer Stadt, die ansonsten auch von Braunkohleabbau und Chemie bestimmt ist.
Aber dieser Kinderwagen, dieses Kinderwagenwerk, was in ganz Osteuropa exportierte, nach ganz Osteuropa exportierte in der DDR-Zeit, war quasi auch der sentimentale Identitätspunkt. Und deswegen von der Bevölkerung sehr stark in der Beobachtung. Und es ist eine große Freude zu sehen, wie viel Aufmerksamkeit und Zustimmung wir erfahren mit unseren experimentellen Prozessen, mit unseren Summer Schools, wo wir ganz Europa und die Welt nach Zeitz einladen, auch mit den ehemaligen Arbeitern und Arbeiterinnen im Kinderwagenwerk. Wir konnten über das JTF-Projekt hinaus, dieses Reallabor ZEKIVA Zeitz hinaus, dann auch mit derselben Richtlinie weitere Wirkung erzielen.
Zusammen mit dem Land Sachsen-Anhalt ein ganzes Bündel von 12 weiteren Projekten im Bereich Industrial Heritage, Industriekultur entwickeln, das über die gesamte Fläche nicht des Landes, aber der des JTF-Fördergebietes passiert, also vom Einzelprojekt den Weg finden auch in ein regionales Ökosystem industriekultureller Vorhaben. Und wir sind seit einiger Zeit auch Nutznießer in einem weiteren JTF-Projekt. In einem weiteren JTF-Projekt, das ist die Zukunftsschmiede Industriekultur, ein Projekt, was sich ganz speziell an die Jugendlichen wendet und das mit den Jugendlichen zusammen, denen die also Nutznießer oder auch Betroffene des Transformationsprozesses, wie Sie ihn hier organisieren, sind, ihre Transformationsstrategie zu entwickeln. Wir bringen also ganz konsequent mehrere Ebenen Transformation, Industriekultur, regionale Identität in diesen Projekten zusammen und haben dabei gelernt von einem Projekt, dessen Leiter ich seit inzwischen 20 Jahren bin, Ferropolis, eine frühe Maßnahme des Kohleausstiegs, da gab es weder den Begriff Kohleausstieg noch gab es Just Transition Funds, sondern es gab einfach 1990 einen ausgekohlten Tagebau und zeitgleich brach die Wende über uns. Und insofern war Stillstand in diesem Norden des mitteldeutschen Reviers.
Heute ist Ferropolis aber ein erfolgreicher, europaweit erfolgreicher Veranstaltungsort, Musikfestivals, Sportevents, die fünf gigantischen Maschinen, die dort stehen, zeigen uns, dass wir dort zumindest die Transformation geschafft haben. Inzwischen erwirtschaftet die kulturelle Nutzung an diesem ehemaligen Tagebau jedes Jahr ungefähr 7,5 Millionen Euro für die Region, nicht für auf der Halbinsel, nicht für die Künstler, Musiker etc., sondern das ist der sogenannte Umwegrentabilitätseffekt. Und wenn man den noch hebelt und sagt, das, was also unmittelbar in die Region fließt für Dienstleister, führt dort auch wieder zu wirtschaftlicher Entwicklung, haben Experten gerechnet, dass wir eine Umwegrentabilität von circa 32 Millionen Euro im Jahr erwirtschaften mit dieser kulturellen Nachnutzung eines Tagebaus. Und man muss sich das, und das macht es so schwierig mit der Transformation, auch heutzutage auch in der Wertschöpfung anders vorstellen, als wir es kennen. Ich nehme mal ein Beispiel, das Festival namens Splash hat vor wenigen Tagen bei uns stattgefunden, da sind dann 30.000 Personen aus Europa auf dieser Fläche.
Und dann denkt man, 30.000, ja, das ist eine Menge, aber eben auch nicht ewig viel. Das Ganze hat aber eine Reichweite von 1,5 Millionen Menschen über Social Media. Das heißt, der Werbewert, den da große Konzerne bezahlen, die ihre ihre Produkte dort zeigen, ist sehr viel größer und das ist natürlich auch ein Werbewert für die Region, den die Region dort nicht bezahlen muss, sondern den sie für sich in Nutzung nehmen kann. Ich will daraus zwei Schlussfolgerungen für JTF versuchen zu formulieren. Das eine ist, und dazu ist es noch ganz wichtig, einen Halbsatz zu sagen, Ferropolis ist damals entstanden als ergebnisoffene Werkstatt am Bauhaus Dessau in den 90er Jahren.
Ich sage ganz bewusst ergebnisoffen, da gab es keinen Masterplan, sondern da gab es einfach nur Zeit und Kreativität, die man investieren konnte, daraus ist dann dieses Projekt entstanden. Daraus zwei Schlussfolgerungen. Eine Förderung aus Programmen wie JTF darf nicht von Anfang an an ganz enge feste Ziele ausgerichtet sein. Dazu ist die Transformationsdynamik einfach zu groß. Eine zweite Schlussfolgerung: Eine solche ergebnisoffene Förderung benötigt aber zugleich eine Exit-Strategie, ähnlich wie bei Start-ups.
Wir können also keine, wir können zwar langfristige Projekte fördern, tun das auch und müssen das auch, aber wir brauchen gleichzeitig für ein Gutteil der Projekte frühzeitig oder in der Mitte des Thema der Förderung eine Betrachtung, wie kann man auch am Markt mit einem solchen Produkt, tourismuswirtschaftlichen Produkt meinetwegen, funktionieren. Ich überspringe mal.
Drei Schlussfolgerungen oder Schlussfolgerungskomplexe. Just Transition Fonds hat eine Herausforderung, so wie er bisher angelegt ist. Er versucht beides zugleich, eine Kompensationslogik, also Arbeitsplätze und Regionen zu schützen, und eine Transformationslogik, also tiefgreifenden Wandel zu unterstützen. Genau dieser Mix beider Linien ist bisher Garant des Erfolgs aus dem JTF oder des JTF. Um aber dieses Programm nun weiterzuentwickeln, müssen wir den Schwerpunkt in neue oder anders aufgestellte europäische Förderungen bauen und müssen darauf achten, dass weiterhin beide, Kompensations- und Transformationslogik, betrachtet und beibehalten werden.
Wir müssen dazu die Pole vielleicht umdrehen. Heutzutage ist die Logik vieler Förderprogramme sind die Ziele eher vage als visionär formuliert, aber ist in der administrativen Umsetzung sehr hart. Vielleicht müssen wir da ein bisschen mehr den Schwerpunkt weniger harte administrative Umsetzung, aber deutlichere Ziele, die man natürlich auch revidieren kann. Zweite Schlussfolgerung, wir müssen unbedingt aus den sektoralen Silos heraus. Ja, sehr schön.
Aus den sektoralen Silos heraus. Wir müssen tatsächlich all die Aspekte Bildung, Wissenschaft, Energie, Kultur miteinander integrativ, immer ortsbezogen, also sektorenübergreifend fördern. Da hat JTF finde ich sehr viel richtig und gut gemacht, so wie es angewendet wurde bei uns. Das wäre also eine Schlussfolgerung für eine Fortschreibung beziehungsweise für eine Integration in neue Programme. Drittens, längere Zeithorizonte.
Unsere Erfahrung mit dem Neuen Europäischen Bauhaus aus JTF gefördert, sehr, sehr knapp ausgeschrieben, kurze Fördersprints, maximal zwei Jahre. Auch das ist durchaus eine Herausforderung, auch das ist nicht nur nachteilig, aber wir brauchen beides, kurz- und langfristige, also Sprints und auch längerfristige Programme, die dann tatsächlich auch Transformation und Identität, neue Identität aufbauen helfen. Ein kurzer Appell ganz zum Schluss. Regionen wie die unsere, also das mitteldeutsche Chemie- und Braunkohlerevier, brauchen gezielte Förderinstrumente. Das haben auch die Vorredner schon sehr gut deutlich gemacht.
Wir müssen also tatsächlich in der Neuausrichtung darauf achten, und ich glaube, das ist vorhin schon in den Gesprächen oder in den Fragen deutlich geworden, dass Bergbau und Bergbautransformation möglicherweise eine Sonderstellung nicht nur vor Ort in den einzelnen Regionen, sondern auch europaweit hat. Jede Nation hat ihre Kohlebergbaureviere, Torf, ich zähle das jetzt mal alles zusammen. Und insofern verbindet Bergbau in einer besonderen Weise quasi Europa, den europäischen Gedanken, ähnlich wie die Landwirtschaft, also beide Urproduktionen. Und es wäre glaube ich sehr hilfreich darüber nachzudenken, ob eine JTF-Ausrichtung, die ja sehr stark auf Energie- und Bergbautransformation gezielt hat, in einer neuen Programmfamilie, in einer neuen Programmfamilie wiederum einen europäischen Schwerpunkt Bergbau oder bergbauliche Transformation ermöglicht.
europäischen Schwerpunkt Bergbau oder bergbauliche Transformation ermöglicht, nicht so sehr weil der Bedarf oder nicht allein weil der Bedarf so groß ist, sondern weil das eben ein Teil der europäischen Identität ist und weil das auch dazu beiträgt, dass wir über Jahrtausende hinweg über Steinkohle, Braunkohle, Torf etc. eine gemeinsame Sprache haben, dieselben Erfahrungen haben mit der Bedeutung der Arbeit im Bergbau, die man neu finden muss. Insofern ist jegliches Programm, was dort jetzt auch durch Sie entwickelt wird im Regie, daraufhin abzuprüfen, ob eine solche spezifische Zuordnung nicht europäisch verordnet sein sollte, weil das Risiko ist natürlich groß, dass auf nationaler Ebene gesagt wird, das sind Teilregionen, die haben schon eh relativ viel Geld bekommen in den letzten Jahren, da wollen wir jetzt mal eine andere Schwerpunktsetzung machen. Also insofern die Empfehlung aus unseren Erfahrungen: Geben Sie diesem Thema dieser Urproduktion Bergbau ein Profil auch in neuen Programmfamilien. Vielen Dank und Glück auf.
Krzysztof Hetman
Thank you very much. And now I give the floor to Ms. Teresa Hux, Regional Development Executive, Western Development Commission, Ireland. Please, the floor is yours.
Teresa Hux
Good morning all. Good morning Chair and thank you for the invitation to be here today. I'll just wait for my slides to pop up and we'll start. Yes, there we go. Thank you very much.
So first and foremost, I'm just going to kick off with some context in terms of the, if you can change next slide please, in the context of the organization that I work for, which is the Western Development Commission. So we are a public body and we're tasked with the social and economic development of the western region for over the last 25 years as you can see outlined here on the left. So we do a number of things in terms of being involved in EU projects across the region. So we are lucky to be beneficiaries of Interreg, of Horizon, most recently of JTF. We also operate our own investment fund, so we provide equity and loans to communities and SMEs across the region among other things.
One key thing to note in terms of context is that we're the only development commission in Ireland, so we're the only regional instrument outside of the regional assemblies that you might know as the managing authorities for our ERDF and JTF programs. And a key thing I suppose about the Irish system that you might well be already know is of course that we're one of the probably the most centralized system. So we're very reliant on central government to deliver and develop these programs in the sense that we have quite weak local and regional government structures. We don't have revenue generating capacity at a regional level, so just to be aware of that. So obviously I've outlined to you previously the region that the WDC, the organization I work for, covers and obviously Colm has already covered in terms of JTF region here on the right.
So you can see there's a bit of an overlap particularly within the counties of Roscommon and Galway and as already noted very well by Colm that this is targeted very much on the peatlands working with the communities that have been most affected by that turn away from peatlands and using that for electrification. So in terms of the Irish JTF program, it's an 169 million euro co-funded program, so probably one of the lower amounts across the JTF programs across the member states and it has that single specific objective to address the social, employment, economic and environmental impacts of the transition towards climate neutrality in line with the Paris Agreement.
So it focuses on four main priorities. The first is on jobs. So it's that look at generating employment for the peatland communities, looking at diversification, how we can move people away from that and look to other jobs. The second is looking at bogs as we know them colloquially. So looking at the peatlands themselves.
So how can we work with locals to actually bring the peatlands back to a good ecological status and also to look at using them in a different way. The third priority is on wheels or what is much more around smart and sustainable mobility within the JTF region. And P4 climate is actually a new priority that has since been added due to a program amendment which I can discuss more in a moment. So as Colm has referred to that, to date we have, sorry, 180 projects selected operations. So 140 million is allocated.
And you can see some of the spread here on the right, that map does need to be updated. But as you can see, P1, that focus on jobs has got the lion's share, particularly in terms of the tourism that Colm has referred to, but also in terms of bioeconomy sector support and I'll touch on that more in a moment. The second is around the bogs. So again, that restoration as I noted in terms of the ecological status of those and the engagement then with the tourism sector also. P3, as you can see, the wheels, the travel part is quite a lot smaller.
And that has looked very much so at the electrification of buses in the region and the charging infrastructure that's come with that. And as I noted, P4, that priority looking at climate is a new priority that's been added on the back of a program amendment after the mid-term review. And that is looking at supporting local authorities to implement their climate action plans. And as you can see, it's funding both infrastructure and feasibility. The evaluation is ongoing.
So 66 applications, as you can see, it's oversubscribed, almost 72 million for a 30 million euro availability there. So just some brief examples in terms of what's worked well. One example from P2, obviously Colm has looked very much at the tourism side, but one example that's been heard quite well from the JTF is a project called Tóchar.
Teresa Hux
Sorry. Tóchar, which is an Irish word looking at ancient paths. And essentially this is about looking at the peatlands and kind of bringing them back to a good ecological status. This is a 12 million euro scheme. And you'll see me speak at the end about resourcing.
There's actually two people working in the NPWS on this scheme, so you can see the risk there straight away. But it has been quite good in terms of engaging the communities, the landowners with the peatlands again in a different kind of way. When we speak as well about diversification and new sector support, one that has been very successful from the JTF is looking at the bioeconomy. So we have funded projects previously in Ireland, but a lot has looked really on the research side, whereas the JTF is the first fund that's came in to fund large pilot scale projects, which is what we know we need to drive things forward. And in particular, the Midlands has much of the feedstock to be able to support that.
So going forward, you know, dependent on how these projects develop, this could actually be something that becomes a regional specialism or something that we can drive forward in terms of the employment. And just to note that WDC are actually involved in one of the projects, Biochar, within that, which I can speak to a bit more if needed. So what have been some of the challenges? I suppose obviously new fund, a new MA working on a fund and also had to grapple with the regulations, develop the stakeholder relationships to actually design the schemes and deliver the program. The targets themselves, as we know from JTF, has been co-funded by MFF and NextGenEU.
So those targets that were aligned to NextGenEU were quite tight for beneficiaries to deliver on. As noted, we're very centralized, we rely on the government departments and they themselves have limited capacity to quickly adapt to the requirements of EU and JTF specific funds.
Obviously, a new IT system has been one of the issues in Ireland for reporting and I'll touch on the evidence base and SCOs on my last slide. So I suppose what are the lessons from an Irish case? In our instance, I suppose it's need for more governmental support and integration across the departments because the fund deals with a lot of different departments and the support and the capacity can be ad hoc dependent on the staff that are in place at the time. Resourcing, as I mentioned, is needed across the cascade really at MA, IB and beneficiary level to actually develop projects and to apply so that we can actually implement the funds quicker, better and target them more succinctly going forward. Practical support on the requirements in terms of whether that be anti-fraud or procurement is always welcome and needed.
Sometimes EU funding can just be cast or looked at as too cumbersome to deal with and that's a perception thing and something we need to work on. I'll touch on this a bit more in my last slide, but national rules can actually add sometimes to the workload of EU funding and again, the IT system is something that we had to talk about. So in terms of the recommendations or the key three key lessons, I suppose, the first one is that transition is social as well as environmental. So transition, the word itself implies time and JTF does need time. The impact measurement of the program in reality is still very much ongoing.
You know, the first schemes were launched in 2024, the mid-term review was just at the end of last year, so it's very much still measuring. But we do need to build on the work of the JTF, a lot of work has gone in to actually get it to where it is today and to get those 180 projects on the ground and to maintain the trust of those projects that are already developed and to build on those, we need to build in that time and continue that engagement. Place-based approaches matter and we know that coming from a regional development perspective that place-based and targeted are needed. We need to use local and regional instruments where possible. This is probably now more than ever more important considering the change to the MFF looking at the national, regional and partnership plans.
If JTF is to be implemented into the social climate fund or wherever it should sit, we should look at things like implementing territorial targeting, ring-fencing, that is a key thing that we need to to maintain that going forward and it's it's crucial that we we do that and I would implore that onto you today. Continuity of course beyond 2027 is crucial, but we do need changes, particularly I suppose in the Irish sense, if we had a national level or a dedicated government department to deal and champion EU funding in particular because at the moment it's quite fragmented across that and also if green transition is something that we're very serious about then we need to have that political will and engagement at that level. Lastly, I would just say simplification is something we always look for in EU funding and it's a lot easier said than done in some instances. For example, in the Irish case, and I know the rules and the regulations give flexibility to develop your own simplified cost options and not look for finance not linked to cost, but but the national rules sometimes can dictate, particularly in Ireland, that even with that that vouched elements are still there, so there are simplifications there that can be used but we haven't put the time into that and that's something I would implore that would be done at an Irish level because that would help with the beneficiary level in terms of releasing the complexity of EU funding but also help with the perception side of things.
And I'll leave it there at the moment. So thank you very much for your time and attention.
Krzysztof Hetman
Thank you very much, Ms. Hooks. Now I give the floor Ms. Repp, two minutes please. Two minutes.
Sabrina Repp
Okay. I'm trying to be as fast as I can. Thank you very much. Vielen Dank für den Besuch heute hier. Auch die zweite Session zeigt uns ja eindrücklich, wie wichtig dieser Austausch miteinander ist, und mich haben sehr viele Punkte sehr bewegt, deswegen danke ich Ihnen einfach für Ihre Zeit.
Ich möchte noch mal auf ein paar Punkte tatsächlich kommen. Herr Schröder, Sie haben gleich zu Beginn auch angesprochen, dass insbesondere Transformationsregionen auch in Jahren, wo zum Beispiel eine Landtagswahl ansteht, noch mal mehr unter Druck geraten, weil wir uns dann tatsächlich die Frage auch stellen müssen: Ist die Transformation vielleicht bereits gescheitert oder auch nicht? Mich würde da von Ihrer Seite einmal interessieren, Sie haben ja ein sehr gutes Beispiel gebracht mit dem Forum Rathenau, mit Ferropolis, wie Transformation auch gelingen kann, wie Transformation auch Wertschöpfung bringen kann. Und dennoch sehen wir, wenn wir uns die aktuellen Umfragen in Sachsen-Anhalt anschauen, dass 41 Prozent der Menschen dort laut aktuellen Umfragen für die AfD wählen würden. Und da würde mich einmal interessieren, welche Rolle spielen Regionen wie Ihre, Beispiele wie Ihre, um vielleicht auch ein Gegenbeispiel, ein positives Beispiel zu setzen, und zwar so, dass die Menschen da auch entsprechend mitgenommen werden.
Dann haben Sie viel auch technisch darüber geredet, dass Sie sich auch noch mal einen größeren Fokus auf die europäische, auf den europäischen Bergbau, auf Teil einer EU-Identität legen wollen, dass wir in einem Just Transition Fund ergebnisoffener agieren müssen und auch Exit-Strategien definitiv mitbedenken müssen und sektorübergreifend fördern sowie längere Zeithorizonte. Das habe ich mir notiert. Mir wäre es aber einmal wichtig zu wissen: Das eine ist, diese Gedanken sich beim Just Transition Fund zu machen, aber ich denke, dass es etwas ist, was wir insgesamt in der europäischen Förderung brauchen, dass diese europäische Förderung eben sich flexibler auch gestaltet und gerade noch mehr auf die Bedürfnisse der Förderempfängerinnen und Förderempfänger eingeht. Sehen Sie das auch so, sehen Sie das anders? Und eine letzte Frage an Sie: Was macht europäische Förderung eigentlich so besonders?
Weil Sie gesagt haben, Sie haben auch Bundesförderung zum Beispiel bei sich vor Ort. Was ist vielleicht auch der Unterschied? Warum ist es Ihnen vielleicht auch egal, woher die Förderung kommt, außer sie kommt? Aber vielleicht können Sie da auch noch mal sagen, was die europäische Förderung für Sie vielleicht auch anders gemacht hat, vielleicht möglich gemacht hat, vielleicht auch noch mal einen anderen Schwerpunkt gesetzt hat. Das würde mich sehr interessieren.
Und an Frau Hooks, vielen Dank auch für Ihren Impuls. Sie haben auch noch mal die nationalen und regionalen Pläne angesprochen und die zukünftige Verwurzelung vom JTF oder eben auch nicht. Wie stellen Sie sich innerhalb der nationalen und regionalen Pläne den Fokus auf Transformation vor? Denn was wir sehen, ist, dass es eher etwas ist, was jetzt ins Hintertreffen gerät, dass auch wir hier auf europäischer Ebene merken, dass eher die Mentalität adaptiert wird: Wird schon alles irgendwie, müssen wir gezielt noch in die grüne Transformation investieren, müssen wir überhaupt noch in Transformation investieren? Und da würde mich einmal auch auf technischer Ebene interessieren, wo Sie Transformation gerade im nächsten mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen so in den Vorschlägen sehen, aber gleichzeitig, was auch Ihre Handlungsempfehlung wäre, wie wir vielleicht da auch Transformation noch mal als Querschnitt oder ähnliches denken können.
Vielen Dank, ich habe meine Zeit überzogen. Vielen Dank, Herr Hetman.
Krzysztof Hetman
Thank you very much. Now I give the floor Ms. Eva Nussmueller from European Commission, three minutes please, Ms. Director.
Eva Nussmueller
Thank you very much. I think what I wanted to say in summing up is that with the JTF, we see that it worked. We see that it worked on the ground and we see also that in terms of outputs it worked. It accelerated, we've proven that it accelerated the transition of coal out, it accelerated decarbonization. So the objective and the governance tool behind it, it works.
The commitment at regional level for a pathway, a transition pathway, was important and it succeeded. And having said that, the transition challenge is still out there. We still have 31 active coal mines in Europe in 11 member states, with about 200,000 people still employed in coal mines and thermal power plants and much more in carbon-intensive industry. So the challenge is there. And therefore we'd strongly, strongly encourage member states to continue with their work on just transition.
The framework is there. The entire architecture, the proposal from the Commission for the architecture in the future is obviously different from what it is now. However, there is a specific objective on just transition. Therefore member states and regions can program in the same way that they've done now, actions, investments and reforms in just transition and we'd strongly, strongly encourage you to do this. Obviously this is a different, it's a different animal that has been proposed here in the future.
It is not a specific fund anymore, but that is also not the idea of the entire Commission proposal for the national and regional partnership plans. The idea is to indeed merge or bring together 14 funds under one common rulebook. So it's not for or against just transition fund as such, the idea is to bring everything together and make it simpler. I think Ms. Hook mentioned it, but I think it was mentioned before as well, that the administrative capacity that was involved in or needed to implement the just transition fund, it was in addition to the ERDF and in addition to the RRF and the people on the ground in the regions that had to implement that had all of a sudden to implement three funds. This is also one of the reasons why we wanted to move away from that.
It doesn't mean that because there is no fund anymore there shouldn't be a just transition process, on the contrary. Also in the future this will be open to all of them, as you very well know, and I think we've heard it from the region of Lublin, from the mayor, that this time it was focused on those with the most that were most affected, but also on those regions that were ready to commit to a transition path. And only those regions that were ready to commit to a transition path and that also codified that in a transition plan were able to get support from the just transition fund. In the future this will be open. However, we do very, very, very strongly encourage you to build on what you've built up already and to build on the just transition plans that you have done already.
And I said it in the beginning, to also take up this challenge again, to define a vision with the people on the ground, so to use the governance structure of these territorial just transition plans also for the future, despite the fact that at the current Commission proposal this is not an obligation. I think this has proved a good instrument and it has proven to deliver.
Maybe just to sum up because I just only had three minutes, I just wanted to say that all of this is possible, we strongly encourage you to do this. And for as you very well know, there is still a current period, there is a very, we heard it, a very strict deadline, payment deadline of the NGEU. We are on a daily basis working with your regional administrations on the ground trying to find the best solutions to make this possible for you to send as much payments until the end of the year as possible. We see that in terms of projects, the projects are out there. I think it's in terms of getting all of this in and getting it to us.
And I think we're working very, very closely together. This is just, I just wanted to say that please, please also to your constituency pass the message that we're out there to help to make sure that also the current Just Transition Fund is still implemented well. Thank you very much.
Krzysztof Hetman
Thank you very much. Now we go back to our experts. First one will be Ms. Theresa Hux. You have two and a half minutes each. I'm sorry, but we have to finish our committee half past eleven.
The floor is yours.
Teresa Hux
That's okay. Thank you, Chair, and thank you to Ms. Rep in particular for your question, I suppose, with regard to the fund, should it be cross-cutting or more focused. I suppose you could look at it in two ways, but in particular, I suppose the key thing and the point of the presentation I hope today that I got across is that we need to first and foremost look at what the JTF fund has done in Ireland and focus on that as a specific territory. There's 180 projects there, and if JTF isn't there, we don't know what'll happen to them. So a lot of the infrastructure in particular has been built and has been put in place via the fund.
So you would like to see in the next iteration that we go back and evaluate and try and connect the community a lot more with that. Yeah, it is, it's true, you know, transition is happening in most places, but in my and could be cross-cutting, but specifically I would like to see in the Irish case anyways that there are funds ring-fenced to some extent that we continue to support this community, that it isn't a one and done because that doesn't build trust or credibility either at that level and the transition is still ongoing as we know. Thank you.
Sakis Arnaoutoglou
I will speak in Greek, I will ask the question in Greek. Και προς τον κύριο Schröder, αναφερθήκατε στη Ferropolis ως παράδειγμα μιας νέας ταυτότητας που δημιουργήθηκε χωρίς αυστηρό αρχικό σχέδιο, αν κατάλαβα σωστά, αλλά και στην ανάγκη κάθε έργο να αποκτά οικονομική βιωσιμότητα. Πώς μπορεί η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση να αφήνει χώρο για δημιουργικό πειραματισμό χωρίς να χρηματοδοτεί έργα που τελικά δεν μπορούν να σταθούν μόνα τους και ποια στοιχεία της Ferropolis θα μπορούσαν να εφαρμοστούν σε μια περιοχή, επαναλαμβάνω, όπως στην ελληνική Δυτική Μακεδονία; Ευχαριστώ.
Thies Schröder
Vielen Dank für die Fragen. Ich versuche mal ganz kurz die beiden Fragen nach der Wertschöpfung zusammenzufassen, Frau Rep und auch der Kollege aus Griechenland. Polis, also Ferropolis ist ja eine lateinisch-griechische Kombination, deswegen danke ich besonders für Ihre Frage. Ich glaube, wir müssen ganz klar sagen, dass die Wertschöpfung, auch die regionale Wertschöpfung natürlich in jedem dieser Projekte geplant ist, dass sie aber nicht automatisch eintritt, weil man einen guten Plan gemacht hat, sondern dass sie tatsächlich erst durch Ausprobieren und durch Anpassen, so wie jedes Unternehmen auch seine Geschäftsstrategie immer wieder anpassen muss, gelingen kann. Das heißt, sie soll Ziel sein, sie muss aber nicht, also sie kann auch an Richtzahlen ausgerichtet sein, sie muss aber nicht sozusagen nach einem festen Geschäftsmodell, was dann über 15, 20 Jahre funktionieren muss, stattgeben.
Gerade in der Kulturindustrie müssen wir so flexibel sein, dass wir zum Teil ganz froh sind, dass wir eben keine laufende Förderung haben, sondern uns immer wieder neu anpassen müssen an die Märkte. Aber für die großen Voraussetzungen, dafür hat es europäischer Mittel bedurft, aus EFRE beispielsweise, um so ein Tagebau-Großgerät zu sanieren. Und diese Mischung, also auf der investiven Seite Förderung, auf der konsumtiven Seite eher vorsichtig und zurückhaltend zu sein oder mit schnellen Exit-Strategien, führen dann im besten Falle zu Wertschöpfung. Das ist nicht, keine Garantie. Es gibt auch keine Blaupause.
Es muss in jeder Region neu gedacht werden, aber es gibt ein paar Grundprinzipien, an die man sich, glaube ich, in jeder Region halten kann. Und dann komme ich zu dem zweiten Fragekomplex, den Frau Repp aufgeworfen hat. Was macht denn die EU-Förderung so besonders? Die EU-Förderung macht so besonders, dass man wählen kann im besten Falle. Dass man überlegen kann, ist das einzelne Projekt auf regionaler, nationaler oder europäischer Ebene inhaltlich aufgehoben, nicht nur weil da Fonds sind, sondern inhaltlich aufgehoben.
Und es tut manchen Projekten sehr gut, sich diese Frage zu stellen, beispielsweise in einem Interreg-Kontext mal einen Antrag zu versuchen oder Horizon oder wie auch immer. Das hat was mit der, mit der Dynamik der eigenen Entwicklung zu tun. Es tut aber manchmal auch sehr gut, in einem ja auch europäisch geförderten Leader-Projekt ganz lokale Argumente zu bedienen. Und ich finde diesen, diesen Multi-Purpose-Ansatz, also Verbundprojekte zu befördern und zu betonen aus europäischer Sicht ganz besonders wichtig. Verbund nicht nur regionenübergreifend oder regionale Verbindungen stiften, sondern auch themenverbindend.
Tatsächlich beispielsweise einen Bioeconomy-, einen Biochar-Ansatz zu verbinden mit Tourismus, so wie Frau Hux das, finde ich, sehr gut hervorgehoben hat oder auch Herr Croffy. Und diese Ansätze sollte man, glaube ich, noch sehr viel mehr in die Kriterien und in die Richtlinien hineinsetzen. Multi-Purpose-Verbundprojekte, Reallabor-Ansatz, Sprints wie Langläufer. Das sind Möglichkeiten, lokale Ansätze so zu entwickeln, dass sie eben auch um Aufmerksamkeit auf europäischer Ebene ringen. Und es ist, glaube ich, sehr, sehr deutlich geworden in der Anhörung heute Morgen, zumindest mein Eindruck, noch mehr als ich es vermutet hatte, dass das Thema Bergbau, Energietransformation weiterhin eines ist, was uns noch beschäftigen wird, weil es ein identitätsstiftendes Projekt, weil es eine Urproduktion ist.
Das ist was anderes, das geht den Menschen tiefer in die Seele als eine andere Transformation, beispielsweise jetzt im Finanzwesen oder ähnliches. Und eine Landtagswahl, liebe Frau Repp, hält die Transformation nicht auf. Aber wir sehen, dass sie noch nicht überall als gerecht, als Just Transition empfunden wird. Und deswegen kann man nur hoffen, dass aus den Erfahrungen des JTF in die nächste Programmfamilie hinein ab 28 viele Richtlinien, und es wurde ja eben auch gesagt, oder viele Erfahrungen übernommen werden, dass also der Just-Transition-Ansatz gestärkt wird, auch wenn er vielleicht nicht mehr in einen eigenen Programmnamen abgibt. Vielen Dank.
Krzysztof Hetman
No plan is perfect. We should end our meeting, but I'll give Mr. Mulloni floor for one minute.
Ciaran Mullooly
Thank you, Chair. And I do want to make a short point, but an important one. I compliment Mr. Schröder on what he has said about the Frappolis project. It's incredible. I need to know more about it.
I will learn more about it. But very, very importantly, the second witness, Ms. Hux, has made a reference and a statement in her presentation: EU funding is cast as too cumbersome. And, you know, she said we must make sure this perception doesn't, it's just a perception.
It's not just a perception, Chair. I want the message to go to our friend from the Commission, Ms. Nussmüller. EU funding in the context of just transition has been seen as problematic at every level. Not just among the community groups, the voluntary sectors, but the local authorities and the regional assemblies. The level of audit, the level of complication has been difficult from day one.
There was a lack of clarity with regard to state aid rule and rules insofar as they apply to just transition, which effectively disqualified a lot of people. So when you say just transition worked, it didn't work for a significant number of people in the community and voluntary sector because state aid rules or a lack of clarity at state aid rules coming from Brussels as well as the Member States disqualified groups. And I'll explain how it happened. The level of matching funding was adjusted based on an interpretation of state aid rules. And because community groups in the voluntary sector could not afford this money, they could not have come forward with their contribution and the projects collapsed.
So I don't think we should not leave this room feeling that this EU JTF worked. It may have worked for some people, but I can tell you, not just in the community and voluntary sector, I'm aware of local authorities, regional assemblies who have said to me, it is too cumbersome. Do you think in Brussels we have a dozen staff to prepare the level of material that's required for this? So we must learn from this going forward, whether it's in ERDF or ESF, we must prepare ourselves to simplify this project going forward and the funding for it going forward. Thank you.
Krzysztof Hetman
Dziękuję bardzo. Chciałbym bardzo serdecznie podziękować za to dzisiejsze posiedzenie. Szczególnie chciałbym podziękować naszym ekspertom. Dziękuję państwu za czas poświęcony, za przyjście do nas na posiedzenie naszej komisji, a i tak niezwykły merytoryczny wkład w dyskusję o transformacji regionów węglowych i przyszłości Funduszu Sprawiedliwej Transformacji. Jestem absolutnie przekonany, że państwa wiedza, dzisiejsze prelekcje przyczynią się do tego, że wszyscy zrozumieją, tak jak powiedział pan Schröder, że nie chodzi tylko i wyłącznie o transformację.
Ale chodzi o to, żeby była ona sprawiedliwa. I naszym celem nie powinno być tylko i wyłącznie to, aby w przyszłości przejść na zielone źródła energii, odnawialne źródła energii, ale podstawowym podmiotem tej zmiany mają być ludzie, którzy w komfortowych warunkach, bezpiecznie dla siebie i dla swoich rodzin mają tą zmianę przejść, a my jesteśmy wszyscy odpowiedzialni za to, aby im w tym pomóc. Niczego nie można zrobić za szybko. Musimy we wszystkim zachować zdrowy rozsądek. Wtedy z pewnością ta zmiana będzie sprawiedliwa i taka, jakiej wszyscy byśmy oczekiwali, a przede wszystkim ci ludzie, o których tutaj dzisiaj rozmawialiśmy.
I chciałbym wszystkich zapewnić, że Komisja Rozwoju Regionalnego w Parlamencie Europejskim, my wszyscy członkowie tej komisji, zawsze będziemy stać na straży regionów, nie tylko w Polsce, w Irlandii, w Niemczech czy w Grecji, ale wszędzie, gdzie one się znajdują na terenie Unii Europejskiej, czy to w terenach oddalonych, wyspiarskich czy peryferyjnych. Macie państwo nasze słowo, że zawsze będziemy stać na straży regionów. Ladies and gentlemen, this is our last committee meeting before the summer break. So thank you very much and I wish everyone a wonderful summer break. Thank you very much.
Sorry, sorry, we don't finish. We don't finish yet. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Mr. Benifei, Mr. Benifei coming.
Okay, thank you very much.
Dragoş Benea
We move to the next point on our agenda and we have the pleasure to welcome Mr. Jack Chambers, the Irish Minister for Public Expenditure, Infrastructure, Public Service Reform and Digitalisation, for an exchange of view on the priorities of the Irish Presidency for the coming months. The debate on the Commission's proposals in the context of new MFF and their impact on cohesion policy will no doubt constitute one of the biggest points on the agenda. I will now invite Mr. Chambers to open the discussion with an introductory statement and after I will give the floor to the members, starting with the representative of political groups. Mr. Minister, you have the floor.
Jack Chambers
Go raibh maith agat, a Chathaoirligh, agus is onóir mhór dom a bheith anseo san Pharlaimint Eorpach agus an coiste seo inniu. Chair, members of the Committee on Regional Development, distinguished colleagues, ladies and gentlemen, thank you for the opportunity to address the REGI Committee today. It's a pleasure to be here to discuss Ireland's priorities for our Presidency of the Council of the European Union, particularly in relation to cohesion policy. As we reflect on the future of regional development and cohesion policy, I'm reminded of a phrase that captures both Ireland's outlook and the very essence of the European project: Ní neart go cur le chéile, strength in unity. These words reflect a simple but powerful truth: Europe is strongest when we work together.
The challenge facing our Union, whether economic, social, environmental, or geopolitical, cannot be addressed by any Member State or region acting alone. Our strength comes from cooperation, solidarity, rule of law, and our shared commitment to ensuring that every region and every citizen has the opportunity to thrive. Nowhere is this principle more visible than in cohesion policy. Through regional investment, territorial cooperation, and partnership across all levels of government, we turn European solidarity into practical results for our communities across our Union. As you will be aware, the Cyprus Presidency successfully reached a partial general approach on the National and Regional Partnership Plans Regulation on the 16th of June and on the European Development Fund and Cohesion Fund Regulation on the 29th of June.
This regulation is designed to increase flexibility for Member States, strengthen the role of regions and local authorities, simplify implementation procedures, and ensure continuity for agriculture and fisheries funding while maintaining a strong link between reforms, investments, and EU funding. The ERDF and Cohesion Fund Regulation, as part of the NRPP, establishes conditions to support disadvantaged areas, sustainable urban development, outermost regions, and Interreg.
We are therefore ready for a smooth start of inter-institutional negotiations when the European Parliament is at the appropriate stage. Ireland has been a significant beneficiary of cohesion policy. Investment in transport infrastructure and upskilling of our workforce were key contributors to our economic growth in recent decades. In parallel, cohesion policy has played a really important role in promoting and supporting peace in Northern Ireland and our border communities. From the first Peace program established by the European Union in 1994 to the Peace Plus program of today, cohesion policy programs have been a central catalyst for peacebuilding.
The story of the Peace programs has much to offer other regions emerging from conflict. The European Union stands at a defining moment. We face significant challenges: geopolitical uncertainty, climate change, demographic shifts, growing global competition, housing pressures, and the need to maintain public confidence in the European project. Yet we also have unprecedented opportunities to strengthen our competitiveness, accelerate the green and digital transitions, and ensure prosperity is shared across all regions of our Union. In meeting these challenges, cohesion policy remains one of the most powerful instruments.
It's the practical expression of European solidarity. It demonstrates to citizens that Europe delivers tangible benefits in their daily lives, whether through better transport links, improved digital connectivity, support for businesses and innovation, investment in skills, or the revitalization of towns and communities. For Ireland, the fundamental purpose of cohesion policy remains unchanged: reducing disparities between regions while supporting sustainable growth, resilience, and social inclusion. Our presidency would have this principle at the center of our work. The priorities for the Irish presidency are assessment of what tasks are most urgent for our Union.
A key area of work is the competitiveness of Europe's economy. Economic prosperity is what enables us to achieve our policy ambitions. Without cohesion policy, we would not have a strong European economy. Members, Europe's strength lies in its diversity. Our regions differ significantly in their geography, economic structures, demographic profiles, and development needs.
A one-size-fits-all approach will not succeed. We must therefore continue to support a place-based model of development that enables regions to identify and build upon their strengths. This is particularly relevant for rural, island, border, coastal, and outer regions. Ireland understands the unique challenges these communities face. Geographical peripherality, declining populations in certain areas, access to services, transport connectivity, and economic diversification remain common concerns across many European regions.
Strengthening regional competitiveness is a priority for Ireland's presidency. Europe's future prosperity depends upon our ability to innovate, increase productivity, and support entrepreneurship in every region. Innovation should not be concentrated solely in our largest metropolitan areas. Smaller cities, rural communities, and peripheral regions possess enormous potential that can and must be unlocked. We would support investments that strengthen research and innovation ecosystems, facilitate technology transfer, support small and medium enterprises, and develop the skills needed for jobs in the future.
At the same time, the twin transitions, the green transition and the digital transition, must be fair and inclusive. The transition to a climate-neutral economy is essential. It's not only an environmental imperative but also an economic opportunity. However, we must recognize that the impacts and costs of transition are not shared equally. Regions dependent on traditional industries, regions facing energy challenges, and communities vulnerable to economic disruption require targeted support and investment.
Our presidency would support efforts to ensure that all regions are equipped to benefit from the transition. Investments in renewable energy, energy efficiency, sustainable transport, nature restoration, and climate resilience must reach every corner of the Union. Similarly, digital transformation must be inclusive. High-speed broadband, digital infrastructure, digital skills, artificial intelligence, and advanced technologies are transforming our economies and societies. Yet digital divides persist between regions.
We must ensure that these divides are narrowed rather than widened. Another critical challenge facing many regions is demographic change. Across Europe, communities are experiencing aging populations, declining birth rates, and migration pressures. These trends have implications for labor markets, public services, healthcare provision, housing, and long-term economic growth. Addressing demographic challenges requires integrated solutions.
It requires investment in skills, lifelong learning, quality employment, affordable housing, childcare, healthcare, and connectivity. Regional policy has an important role to play in helping communities adapt to demographic change while maintaining vibrant and sustainable local economies. Our presidency would encourage continued dialogue on how European policies can support member states and regions in addressing this pressing challenge. The success of cohesion policy depends not only on the resources available, but also on its implementation. Local authorities, regional governments, civil society organizations, and project promoters frequently highlight the complexity of administrative procedures.
Simplification must therefore remain a critical priority. We should strive for a framework that maintains strong standards of accountability and transparency while reducing unnecessary administrative burdens. European funding should be accessible, efficient, and responsive. Citizens should see results on the ground, not excessive bureaucracy. Partnership remains essential.
Effective cohesion policy requires collaboration between European institutions, member states, regional authorities, local communities, and stakeholders. This partnership principle is one of the great strengths of cohesion policy and must continue to guide our approach. Cross-border cooperation represents another area of strategic importance. Programs such as Interreg have demonstrated their capacity to build connections, support economic development, strengthen public services, and foster mutual understanding across borders. For Ireland, the value of European territorial cooperation is well understood.
I've referenced the PEACE PLUS program, where European solidarity translated into practical action, supporting peace, prosperity, and cooperation across the island of Ireland, leaving a lasting legacy for future generations. At a time when geopolitical tensions remind us of the importance of European unity, territorial cooperation remains more relevant than ever. We should continue to support initiatives that strengthen cross-border collaboration and enable regions to work together on shared challenges, whether those challenges relate to transport, energy, climate adaptation, innovation, or public services. Looking ahead, discussions on the future cohesion policy will be of particular significance. Ireland believes that cohesion policy should remain a central pillar of the European project.
It should continue to be adequately funded, strategically focused, and firmly rooted in the objective of reducing disparities. At the same time, it must evolve to meet emerging challenges and support Europe's wider strategic ambitions. A stronger, more competitive Europe requires stronger regions. A greener Europe requires empowered local communities. A more resilient Europe requires investment that reaches citizens where they live and work.
Chair, members, the challenges facing Europe are substantial, but so too is our capacity to address them together. Throughout its history, the European Union has demonstrated that solidarity and cooperation deliver results. Cohesion policy is one of the clearest examples of this principle in action. It has transformed regions, created opportunities, enhanced resilience, and strengthened the bonds that unite our Union. Ireland will approach the presidency with a commitment to collaboration, pragmatism, and ambition.
We want to work closely with the European Parliament, the Commission, Member States, regional authorities, and stakeholders to ensure that Europe's regions remain at the heart of our common agenda. Together we can build a Europe that is more competitive, more sustainable, more innovative, and more cohesive. A Europe where every region has the opportunity to thrive and every citizen can share in our collective prosperity. Thank you for your attention and I look forward to your discussion.
Dragoş Benea
Thank you very much, Mr. Chambers. Now I would like to give the floor to the members and we start with Mrs. Le Calennec from EPP.
Isabelle Le Callennec
Oui, merci Monsieur le Président. Merci beaucoup Monsieur le Ministre pour votre présence et cette présentation. Nous sommes ici membres de la commission REGI, celle qui traite des politiques régionales. Inutile de vous dire que nous avons quelques inquiétudes sur la politique de cohésion à venir et les financements qui lui seront dévolus. Nous venons d'avoir un débat, par exemple, sur le fonds de transition juste qui a d'ailleurs bénéficié à quelques régions en Irlande, qui a donné des résultats, mais nous ne sommes absolument pas assurés qu'il sera prolongé demain puisque, et vous l'avez dit, la logique qui va s'imposer maintenant ce sont ces fameux plans nationaux et régionaux.
Quant au fonds compétitivité, il est encore difficile de savoir quels secteurs pourront en bénéficier et à quelle hauteur. Nous vous rejoignons sur la nécessité de soutenir l'économie européenne et sa compétitivité, sans laquelle il n'y a pas de politique sociale possible, ni de soutien à l'adaptation au dérèglement climatique. Nous avons noté l'impact de l'hiver démographique comme vous, qui est devant nous si nous ne faisons rien, mais nous sommes convaincus que nous pouvons encore agir. Il n'y a pas de fatalité en la matière. Et merci d'avoir repris l'objectif de simplification qui doit s'inviter dans tous nos secteurs d'activité à travers ce qu'on appelle désormais les omnibus.
Cela vaut pour l'accès aux fonds de cohésion et l'accès à Interreg, et merci de l'avoir cité. Sachez enfin que les régions souhaitent continuer à être des interlocuteurs majeurs de l'Union. Sur les intentions de la présidence, merci d'avoir rappelé les différentes intentions. En matière de transport et de MIE, d'interconnexion, je sais que c'est un sujet que vous traitez même personnellement, je voulais savoir comment vous abordez la question. Sur le logement, moi je suis membre de la commission spéciale logement, l'Irlande est souvent citée en exemple comme tant un pays comme tant d'autres qui traverse une crise en matière d'accès au logement.
Merci d'avoir rappelé aussi les intentions en matière de territoires ultrapériphériques, même si l'Irlande n'est pas directement concernée, mais il y a eu des annonces de faites de la part de la Commission et l'Espagne, le Portugal et la France sont concernés. Peut-être vous entendre exactement aussi parce que je pense que l'Irlande est sensible à ce sujet sur les stratégies industrielles maritimes et la stratégie portuaire qui a été présentée par la Commission, qui est très intéressante et qui mérite d'être implémentée. Et une dernière question beaucoup plus sensible sur les ressources propres. Vous savez qu'on débat actuellement sur le cadre financier pluriannuel. Pouvez-vous nous dire comment la présidence irlandaise aborde ce sujet ultra sensible des ressources propres ?
Sérgio Gonçalves
Thank you, Chair. I will speak in Portuguese. Senhor Ministro Jack Chambers, este é um ano que poderá ser particularmente importante para as regiões insulares, com a apresentação da estratégia para as ilhas e comunidades costeiras e de uma nova estratégia para as regiões ultraperiféricas. E por isso questiono como pretende a presidência irlandesa assegurar o seguimento de ambas as estratégias pelos Estados-Membros, que será fundamental para assegurar a sua eficácia e implementação efetiva. Eu reconheço o passo positivo que o Conselho deu recentemente ao apoiar o reforço da participação das autoridades locais e regionais na preparação, implementação e avaliação dos planos de parceria nacionais e regionais na sua posição sobre este relatório.
No entanto, a posição do Conselho continua a deixar aos Estados-Membros a decisão sobre a criação de capítulos regionais e a atribuição de responsabilidades de gestão, isto se o considerar relevante, o que é igualmente subjetivo. Pergunto-lhe se esta presidência está disponível para garantir a defesa efetiva e também a participação das regiões europeias, como o Parlamento defendeu no seu relatório intercalar, ou se irá permitir que as regiões continuem dependentes da vontade dos governos nacionais. Eu sou de uma região ultraperiférica, da Madeira. Sendo o senhor ministro oriundo de um Estado-Membro insular, estou certo que compreende estas minhas preocupações. Obrigado.
Ciaran Mullooly
Thank you, Chair. And I'd like to welcome my fellow countryman, Minister Chambers, to the REGI Committee. I do so on behalf of the Renew Europe Group. I'd like to wish you well for the presidency. You have a busy six months ahead of you.
I suppose you know the backdrop to your arrival, Minister, is the new structures, the NRPPs. You've already heard from colleagues about our concerns. So I'm going to try and suppose keep our questions straightforward to you. But on behalf of every Member State, it's not a question for an Irish person as for our Chair. Will we have the regional assemblies and the local authorities at the table when it comes to the final conclusion of NRPPs?
Will we have that say? That's what our members want right across this region. Because otherwise there's a feeling in this chamber and in our committee on a regular basis that what we're actually seeing is renationalisation of funds. That the funds are being sent from Brussels back to Dublin and that you and your colleagues around the cabinet table will make the decisions for the regions of Ireland in the future. And I think members across the board here are opposed to that.
PEACE PLUS has been mentioned and the ongoing work that's been done there. There's a lack of clarity, I suppose, going forward and a lack of stability for many of those involved in the PEACE PLUS programme. Minister, when I speak to them, they're not sure about their contracts for next year, which is difficult for anybody in a position of employment, but it has implications for the development of the regions as well and the border regions. So I would be hoping that you will deal with that situation. Our regional assemblies are also looking at a changing time in terms of the classification of regions.
And it's not just Ireland that says we have a two-speed economy in many respects in different areas. We have regions such as the North-West of Ireland where the city of Galway is progressing very well from an economic perspective and therefore the classification of the region changes. It's no longer seen as lagging. But as you well know, many parts of rural Mayo and Sligo and Leitrim and Roscommon are way, way behind and therefore are not receiving the level of funding they should do as a result of so I would ask you to have a look at the regional disparities across Europe, not just in one area. I'd like to speak to you, I suppose, particularly the Just Transition Fund has been mentioned because when we received the MFF proposals from the Commission last year, to say there was a disappointment with regard to the absence of an EU JTF going forward is an understatement, particularly for me personally.
The Parliament has made its opinion crystal clear on this on multiple times since. As recently as yesterday, we voted to include in the European Social Fund in the next MFF a ring-fenced allocation for this crucial EU Just Transition area in line with the objectives of the original regulation to be made available for regions most affected by decarbonization. So my question to you, Minister, is given this vote by Member States across the board and MEPs from Member States across the board yesterday and the broad majority in plenary last September, will you commit to working to ensure real EU added value when it comes to Just Transition support, not just via the national plans involved? In other words, will you put your hand up and say let's ring-fence the funding where it is necessary to do so? And finally, one question I suppose overall question, we're seeing the fight, Minister, as you know, for the future of the EU budget play out in front of us at the moment.
I think the lack of a proposal was a particular disappointment.
And you know quite well many Member States have made no secret of their desire to cut the budget by as much as 400 billion, a fifth of what was originally proposed by the Commission. So I ask you today, with cohesion budgets already squeezed in the original Commission proposal, how are you going to use this Irish Presidency to ensure that our regions continue to get this vital lifeline? It is fine coming in, as you have said today, that you will endeavor to ensure that the funding will continue to be made adequately available for the regions, but how are you going to tackle that issue in the difficult scenario we have in terms of the stated intentions of other Member States? Thank you very much.
Kathleen Funchion
Go raibh maith agat, a Chathaoirligh, agus fáilte romhat. You're very welcome and thank you for being here with us and I want to wish you all the best in your your role ahead as well, Minister. I'm delighted to hear you mention the PEACE PLUS. We actually that was in a debate here that we had yesterday and there is always a lot of very good will towards the PEACE PLUS program, but I think it's really important that we always say it has to be protected with its own budget line and allocation enshrined in the primary legislation because I always have a fear that everyone says yes they support PEACE PLUS, but we know we actually need to match that with the with the numbers and the figures. So going forward, myself and I suppose other colleagues as well will be tabling amendments and I'm really glad that you mentioned that because it's important for others to understand how important that is as well from an Irish perspective.
It's also standard, Minister, in here when we talk about the EU budget that we name the, you know, outermost regions, eastern border, and northernmost regions because obviously they have a legitimate special status or special case. And recently the Commission strategy for islands stated that the next multiannual financial framework and in particular the national and regional partnership plans offer an opportunity for place-based investment reflecting the needs and opportunities of islands. And it also recognizes that their insularity limits their capacity for sustainable growth and resilience at the same time their territorial specificities, cultural heritage, and natural environment offer significant and diverse opportunities. I was delighted to see that and I welcome the advancement of that strategy. We are obviously in a very unique situation in Ireland, particularly now as well as a result of Brexit, it's been pronounced even more after Brexit.
And I would just want to ask you what are your plans in relation to pushing forward with this strategy and in general how you will fight to recognize I suppose our insularity problem in Ireland when it comes to state aid for airports, fisheries, and energy sectors? We know that we have to contribute more and we are a massive net contributor, that is absolutely fine, but we also do have this other situation and it comes up a lot when you're meeting with stakeholder groups around the difference obviously between being on mainland Europe and when you're an island and it's not just for ourselves, it's for other areas too.
So I wanted to know in relation to your role in the Irish presidency, what are your plans and recognition of this and what you can do to push this forward. I also want to ask in relation to cohesion funding which I know you mentioned. We've seen you know huge benefits of this in Ireland and I always think the one that stands out to people is our road infrastructure. It's one that they always identify with the EU in a positive and we need more and more examples of that as well going forward. So we have the negotiations now, I think there is an expectation that they will be concluded in the Irish presidency and in relation to CAP, in relation to cohesion and other funds, we talk about it a lot but there is a danger of funds being chipped away in relation to the defense and strengthening that.
And as I always say, if you're going to strengthen that fund, then where is the money coming from because we only have one pot of money. So I just want to ask your views in relation to that and will you commit to ensuring if those negotiations do end up coming to a conclusion under the Irish presidency that we won't have an EU budget that looks to strengthen defense at the risk of cohesion or CAP or any of these other really good funds that real genuine people and communities benefit from in all of our regions. Thank you minister and thank you chair.
Sabrina Repp
Herzlich willkommen bei uns im Europäischen Parlament. I can wait a second. Sure. Thank you. Herzlich willkommen bei uns hier im Europäischen Parlament, wir freuen uns sehr, dass Sie heute hier sind und natürlich sind wir im Regionalentwicklungsausschuss sehr darauf fokussiert, wie es in den Verhandlungen zum kommenden EU-Haushalt weitergeht.
Und natürlich hat Irland eine sehr wichtige Rolle und eine sehr wichtige Funktion. Zypern hat einen Verhandlungsvorschlag vorgelegt. Und für uns stellt sich natürlich ganz groß die Frage, wie werden Sie als Irland, als irische Ratspräsidentschaft damit umgehen? Es wurden zum Beispiel Kürzungen vorgeschlagen in verschiedenen Bereichen. Wir aus dem Regionalentwicklungsausschuss sehen das sinkende Budget insgesamt der Kohäsionsmittel für sehr drastisch an und finden es auch nicht gut, dass die Kohäsionsmittel entsprechend gekürzt werden.
Bevor Sie kamen, hatten wir auch zwei Vertreterinnen aus Irland hier, die sehr eindrücklich gezeigt haben, was sie mit Kohäsionsmitteln auch in Irland bewegen konnten. Mich würde interessieren, wie blicken Sie auf die Kohäsionsmittel, die auch für Infrastruktur, für all die Maßnahmen, die Sie erwähnt haben, sehr wichtig sind? Werden Sie sich dafür einsetzen, dass die Kohäsionsmittel erhöht werden? Oder und werden Sie sich dagegen einsetzen, dass weiter auch von Seiten des Rates weitere Kürzungen am mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen vorangestrebt werden? Ich muss in aller Deutlichkeit sagen, dass wir in der Herausforderung stehen, dass insbesondere die Kommission und die Mitgliedstaaten in Wettbewerbsfähigkeit und Verteidigung investieren wollen.
Und das sind neue Prioritäten, dagegen sind wir nicht. Aber wir sind dagegen, dass diese Investitionen zu Lasten der Kohäsions- und Agrarmittel gehen und zu Lasten der regionalen Mitbestimmung. Ich möchte an der Stelle Ihnen noch mal sehr deutlich sagen, dass die Mittel, die dann wegfallen, weder von den Mitgliedstaaten noch von den Regionen kompensiert werden können. Das bedeutet, diese Mittel wird es einfach nicht mehr geben, zum Beispiel um Transformationsprozesse auch in Irland voranzutreiben. Und da müssen wir tatsächlich Antworten finden.
Denn auch, wir hatten gerade eine Anhörung, wo es um Transformationsherausforderungen geht und auch die Akzeptanz innerhalb der Bevölkerung. Und da wurde auch noch mal sehr deutlich bei all den Herausforderungen, die wir haben, ist es sehr wichtig, die Menschen vor Ort mitzunehmen.
Und das gelingt aus unserer Sicht schon sehr gut mit den bestehenden Kohäsionsmitteln. Deswegen interessiert uns natürlich sehr, wie Sie sich in den kommenden Verhandlungen zum mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen in diesem Bewusstsein auch positionieren werden und wie wir auch vielleicht gemeinsam die Verhandlung vor allem zu den nationalen und regionalen Plänen zusammenzurren können. Denn es geht ganz konkret um Investitionen in Infrastruktur, um die um Investitionen in Menschen vor Ort, also genau eigentlich von Ihrer Zuständigkeit her. Also brauchen wir nach wie vor auch als EU-Parlament starke Verbündete in diesem Thema. Uns hilft es nicht, weiter Kürzungen voranzutreiben.
Warum nicht? Weil wir eine handlungsfähige Europäische Union brauchen, das heute mehr denn je. Und wir können all diese Aufgaben, die wir erfüllen wollen, und das wollen wir gut, nur erfüllen, wenn wir ausreichend Mittel zur Verfügung haben. Deswegen ist auch die Frage meiner Kollegin aus Frankreich total wichtig, wie es sich eigentlich auch mit den Eigenmitteln verhält. Also wie schaffen wir es tatsächlich, ein stabiles Budget auf die Beine zu stellen, um die Europäische Union handlungsfähig zu gestalten?
Und das würde mich von Ihrer Seite interessieren, wie Sie gedenken, in diese Haushaltsverhandlungen zu gehen und so für eine Balance zu sorgen zwischen dem, was vor Ort tatsächlich investiert wird, und dem, wie wir unsere Gesellschaft und unser Europa noch zusammenhalten. Vielen Dank.
Jack Chambers
Thank you very much and appreciate the wide contributions from from all the members. And just to say, I think most of you have raised the need for a more definitive allocation of funds in the context of cohesion policy. That's a common position which has been reflected today and as this has also been raised for other instruments too. What I would say is that obviously that's totally connected to the wider horizontal discussion on the financial aspects of the multiannual financial framework, which are ongoing, as you all know, at the General Affairs Council. And all of the figures you see in the negotiation box remain under negotiation.
And obviously the wider search for a delicate balance. And it's clear from the reactions to the negotiation box, including at the European Council, that there's currently no consensus among member states on the volume of the budget. I would say discussion on volume should also be viewed in light of the ongoing work on the revenue side, as well as the reality that many member states are facing substantial fiscal pressures. And this is a real constraint on the level which can be agreed to. So what I would say is that obviously we want to separately progress that as well.
And I would say the Irish presidency fully shares your commitment to give the Union the resources it needs to act. And we want to have a positive, pragmatic and balanced outcome in that context. On the wider point that's been raised as well in terms of the kind of the architecture around the NRPP and the concerns that have been raised around it. When it comes to structure, some changes have been integrated, as you know, into the Council's discussions since the start of the negotiations, particularly after the meeting of the three presidents in November of last year. But we want to ensure that the wider architecture is balanced and strongly supports farmers and and also involves regions, which I know is of particular importance and has been raised by a number of you.
Some of the other areas that have been raised, like I will in terms of Mr. Mullally on the wider point of PEACE PLUS. Specific funding matters can be raised with my own office directly related to anything for next year. Obviously we have in the current nego box we've sought to progress that as I referenced and just to function as well in terms of the next phase of funding.
But if there's any particular concerns related to the current context we're happy to engage with you directly. And so look I think you know the wider emphasis here around level of funding and obviously local involvement are know important considerations that that forms the context of the broader discussion within the MFF. I know Ms. Lagalaki you raised I mean I would share your view on on simplification and on in a in a wider context. And obviously you've referenced other other areas there from in terms of housing and other matters. But we appreciate the on own resources as has been raised as well I think by by Ms. Repp.
What I would say on that is that's obviously a matter as part of the broader negotiation that's going within ongoing within the within the MFF. But we appreciate the the wider feedback and input that's been given and look forward to the engagement over the next number of months. So just to conclude today's discussion I want to begin by thanking everyone in the committee for a constructive exchange. And I think you know it reflects the broader importance of regional development to the future of Europe which we share and the deep commitment of this committee to ensuring that cohesion remains at the heart of the European project. I think a broader theme and reflected by many of you is that Europe's future success depends on the success and the involvement of its regions.
Whether we're talking about competitiveness, innovation, housing, demographic change, security, digitalization or economic resilience, every major European objective ultimately depends on what happens in our cities, our towns, our villages, our rural communities and our regions. And that's why cohesion policy matters. It's sometimes described as an investment policy. It's certainly that, but it's also much more. It's one of the clearest expressions I think of European solidarity.
It translates our shared values into practical action. It shows citizens that the European Union is not an abstract institution but a partner that invests in in their communities and helps create opportunities for future generations. And if there's one lesson from the history of the European cohesion policy it's that targeted investment, effective partnerships and long-term commitment produce results. Across Europe we can see evidence of this every day. We see it in regenerated urban centers that have attracted new investment and jobs.
We see it in rural communities connected through broadband infrastructure, research centers and innovation hubs supporting Europe's technological leadership. We see it in transport links that brings regions closer together. And as we look ahead it's vital that we preserve this success while adapting to new realities. We face growing demands and increasing expectations and resources must be used strategically and effectively. At the same time we must ensure that the cohesion policy remains true to its founding purpose, reducing disparities, supporting balanced development and strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion across the Union.
These objectives are no less relevant today than they were when cohesion policy was first established and if anything they're even more relevant. The growth of new technologies, the transition to net zero emissions, changing demographics and evolving geopolitical realities all risk widening territorial disparities if we do not act decisively. So our response must be ambitious. We need regions that are innovative and competitive, that are green and climate resilient, regions that are digitally connected and regions that can attract and retain talent so that citizens have the the jobs, the housing and the healthcare regardless of where they live. And the European Parliament has a vital role to play in that partnership.
Member States have a vital role to play and regions and local authorities do as well.
And so that partnership principle is one of the greatest strengths of cohesion policy and Ireland greatly values the work of this committee in that regard. The REGI committee has consistently championed the interests of Europe's regions and helped ensure that regional voices are heard in the development of European policy. Your expertise, scrutiny and commitment will continue to be essential as discussions progress on the future direction of policy in the next generation of European investment programs. We want a Europe that is prosperous, that is sustainable, that's innovative, that's resilient and above all a Europe that is cohesive. So a Europe in which opportunities are not determined by geography, a Europe in which every region can realize its potential, in which citizens feel connected to not only their local communities but also to our shared European endeavor.
And that vision requires determination, cooperation and leadership. And Ireland stands ready to work constructively with the Parliament, with the Commission and with member states to advance these objectives. So as we look forward, let us build on the wider achievements, continue to invest in people, communities and in places. And I've heard the wider feedback today in the context of the MFF discussions which are ongoing and obviously we want to take that on board constructively across our broader engagement within the European presidency. So thank you.
Speaker 27
Mr. Daniel Buda wants to have from EPP, he came later because... Thank you very much, Mr. President. Please put your headset, Mr. Commissioner, Mr. Ministry.
Daniel Buda
Domnule președinte, mulțumesc foarte mult că mi-ați dat cuvântul. Îmi cer scuze că am urmărit din birou dezbaterea cu domnul ministru, însă am participat la o reuniune a cu beneficiari din țara mea, din România, peste 200 de participanți la acest eveniment legat exact de politica de coeziune și de implementarea noului cadru financiar multianual. Și s-au ridicat câteva chestiuni foarte importante acolo legat de ce înseamnă predictibilitatea fondurilor europene, pe de o parte. Pe de altă parte, legat de ceea ce înseamnă birocrația care de foarte multe ori frânează absorbția fondurilor europene. Domnule ministru, suntem într-un plin proces de creionare a noilor politici europene.
Pentru noi este foarte important să facem tot ceea ce trebuie pentru ca acești beneficiari să aibă garanția legat de accesibilitatea fondurilor europene, că nu vom avea o bătălie între fermieri și cei care beneficiază de bani din politica de coeziune. Nici nu știți cât de preocupați sunt de această chestiune, pentru că depind foarte mult de guverne, de miniștri, cine o să fie la guvernare și de aceea este pentru noi important să clarificăm aceste aspecte. Și chestiunea legată de ceea ce înseamnă locurile de muncă bine plătite. Cred că pentru noi, ca și Uniune Europeană, pentru că tot avem acest obiectiv, dreptul de a rămâne fiecare acasă acolo unde trăiește, trebuie să fie dublat de necesitatea de a investi în locuri de muncă bine plătite. Pentru că altfel eficiența politicii de coeziune va fi redusă câtă vreme noi vom investi în școli, în spitale, în tot felul de investiții publice, dar cetățenii vor pleca de acolo pentru că nu au locuri de muncă bine plătite.
Este un obiectiv pe care trebuie să-l avem în vedere și dumneavoastră aveți o mare responsabilitate pentru că sunteți în plin proces în această situație, în această ecuație. Și închei prin a spune încă o dată și aspectele legate de construcția de locuințe.
Lumea așteaptă foarte mult de la noi să punem pe masă instrumente pe care statele membre într-adevăr să poată să fie să le poată accesa. Pentru că este, în opinia mea, este una dintre marile probleme pe care le au nu doar tineretul de astăzi, ci întreaga populație a Uniunii Europene sau o bună parte a populației Uniunii Europene se confruntă cu o astfel de situație. Dar aspectele legate de locurile de muncă bine plătite cred că trebuie să fie un obiectiv pentru dumneavoastră, pentru că doar așa vom putea garanta dreptul fiecărui cetățean european de a rămâne acasă.
Jack Chambers
Absolutely. Well, I think if you look at the history of cohesion policy, we've seen how in terms in social, economic and territorial cohesion, it has been an instrument of positive growth and well-paid jobs across many of the regions that I've examined in in the history of cohesion policy. And that has to be a shared outlook and objective for the future as well. I believe both domestically and at a European level, we absolutely need to be laser-like on simplification and making sure that that works for everybody. I think we've had excessive growth of bureaucracy for years and we have to have enabling structures and processes that work better for everybody.
And simplification is a core objective of the wider presidency that we have across all files and look forward to cooperation on that as well. And what I would say is that your wider point about the need to put citizens at the center of our work is is absolutely essential to build that solidarity and make the case in and using cohesion policy as an instrument to do that. So appreciate your contribution.
Dragoş Benea
Thank you, Mr. Minister Chambers, for this open exchange with the members of our committee. My thanks go equally to all of you for sharing your views and contributing to the debate, as well as our interpreters for facilitating today's discussions. With that, we conclude our meeting. I wish you all a well-deserved summer break and I look forward to welcoming you back at our next REGI meeting on 1st September. Thank you so much.