Committee
Enterprise and Culture Committee, 13 Mar 2007
13 Mar 2007 · S2 · Enterprise and Culture Committee
Item of business
European Structural Funds
Professor Bachtler:
Watch on SPTV
We were asked to identify a few issues for the committee's consideration that might form part of its legacy paper, although they do not form part of the report. We believe that two sets of issues could be of interest to a future committee. The first concerns the effectiveness and efficiency of the new generation of programmes that are going to operate in the period 2007 to 2013. As we said in our report, the objectives of cohesion policy have changed for the next period, which has implications for who is going to get EU funding in Scotland and how it is going to be used. There is likely to be more of a focus on the Lisbon agenda—in other words, promoting economic growth and entrepreneurship and encouraging innovation—than on regional and local development, although that will still be part of the programmes. The programmes will operate on a Scotland-wide basis rather than in defined areas, as was the case in the past. In some respects, that is a significant shift from a regional-policy philosophy to an enterprise-policy approach. The Scottish Executive has still to finalise its operational programmes. We understand that it will do so by the end of this month. Another aspect of the changes is that the Scottish Executive has proposed a new approach to administering the funds, moving away from the PME-based approach that we have seen up to now. That is likely to involve a mix of a commissioning approach—in other words, allocating tranches of funding to organisations, such as the development agencies or community planning partnerships—and the retention of a challenge fund approach for some of the funding, which will involve some of the funding being delivered through a competitive bidding system, but with fewer organisations being involved than are involved at present. There will be a programme for the Highlands and Islands and a programme for the rest of Scotland. The arguments that have been used to justify those shifts relate to added value, value for money, effectiveness and efficiency. A successor committee might like to consider various questions in that regard. Will the new approach provide added value for Scotland? To what extent will the funding be used to promote innovation, in terms of not only research and development but experimental approaches to economic development, which is something that the European Commission has been pushing? Will the new system be more efficient and, therefore, provide value for money? Further, what will be the consequences for regional and local development efforts of the fact that some of the existing beneficiaries will lose out in the new system?The other set of issues that could be of interest to a successor committee is medium and long-term issues that concern the future of the EU's European cohesion policy in Scotland. It was only last year that the EU agreed a reform of its finances and policies, including cohesion policy. However, as you might recall, the budgetary debate was strongly contested and the agreement that was achieved was only a temporary compromise. Part of the budget deal contained an important provision relating to a major review of all areas of EU policy expenditure as well as its income. That budget review will take place in 2008-09 and will be carried out by the European Commission. Member states and others are already starting to think about how they can influence the outcome, as it could define the shape of EU policy areas and spending areas until 2020.Some key questions will arise. What is the balance among spending on agricultural policy, cohesion policy, policies to promote competitiveness and the other areas that are rising up the policy agenda in Europe—energy, environment, security and so on? That debate clearly matters to Scotland, and it may be appropriate for this committee—perhaps working with other committees—to make a timely contribution to it.
In the same item of business
The Convener:
SNP
For agenda item 2, I welcome Dr Sara Davies, senior research fellow, and Professor John Bachtler, director, of the European policies research centre at the U...
Professor John Bachtler (University of Strathclyde):
Thank you and good afternoon. We are pleased to be here. We cannot quite compete with the glamour of the previous discussion on sport, but we will do our bes...
Dr Sara Davies (University of Strathclyde):
I will outline the research questions that the committee asked us to consider before talking briefly about the methodology and looking at an overview of the ...
Professor Bachtler:
We were asked to identify a few issues for the committee's consideration that might form part of its legacy paper, although they do not form part of the repo...
The Convener:
SNP
That was helpful, and thank you for the report. I invite comments and questions.
Christine May:
Lab
I am getting the blame for the research—I use the word "blame" advisedly. I am sorry if I am an anorak, but I found the report and presentation extremely int...
The Convener:
SNP
We are a wee bit tight for time, so it would be helpful if you could keep your answers reasonably tight.
Professor Bachtler:
Those are good questions. As was said, we have taken a different approach in Scotland. In part, that reflects the fact that the system in Scotland was create...
Dr Davies:
One interesting aspect of the new period, which runs from this year to 2013, is that EU rules are becoming more stringent on themes—on the categories of spen...
The Convener:
SNP
The Executive recently announced that the minimum size of projects will increase to achieve more bang for the buck in the next six years, but small local pro...
Professor Bachtler:
As Sara Davies said in her presentation, like other parts of the UK, Scotland has allocated structural funds to a much larger number and more diverse range o...
Christine May:
Lab
I was part of a local authority that had a clawback from the first round of funding towards the end of the second round. That happened because papers were mi...
Dr Davies:
One reason for the strong focus on community development and voluntary organisations in Scotland and elsewhere in the UK is that, in the early 1990s, no one ...
Susan Deacon:
Lab
I am conscious that Christine May was rather apologetic about raising the matter, so I stress that it is helpful that she did so. There are many issues that ...
The Convener:
SNP
I stress that we are taking the research seriously and that our findings will be passed to our successor committee and to the European and External Relations...
Christine May:
Lab
In addition, the repercussions of changes will be around for a while, not only in managing the changes but in picking up on issues afterwards.I worry that we...
The Convener:
SNP
Professor Bachtler, do you want the last word?
Professor Bachtler:
I do not know whether it will be the last word, but I will try to respond briefly to a couple of the points that have been raised.On complexity, Christine Ma...
The Convener:
SNP
Thank you—that was very helpful. I am sure that we will take these issues forward; as Christine May said, loads of issues will be around for the next six yea...
Meeting closed at 16:41.