1. European Social Fund EU budget Review and 5th Cohesion Report European Social Fund Dirk Reyntjens, DG EMPL ESF Coordination Unit ESF Evaluation partnership meeting 19 November 2010

2. European Social Fund  Delivering key policy priorities  EU added value  A results-driven budget  Mutual benefits through solidarity  A reformed financing of the budget Five key principles for the budget

3. European Social Fund Emerging vision for the EU  The Europe 2020 strategy – towards a smart, sustainable and inclusive Union  New emphasis on policy priorities to be supported by the EU budget  The issue is not about spending more or less – but to spend more intelligently  Develop the right tools to make a difference for the EU citizens

4. European Social Fund Research and innovation  A common strategic framework for innovation: Innovation Union  Refocus on major societal challenges, such as energy supplies and greenhouse gas emissions reductions  Deliver the European Research Area and modernise education systems Infrastructures of the future  cross-border infrastructure in transport (inter-modal connections), communication (high-speed broadband) and energy (smart technologies)  Appropriate regulatory framework and strong involvement of private investors. Smart growth

5. European Social Fund Mainstreaming energy and climate policies  Large-scale dedicated funds devoted to investment in distinct programmes  Mainstreaming inside policies like research, cohesion, agriculture and rural development may be more efficient. The Common Agricultural Policy  Direct payments: strong case for progressively bringing payments levels closer together and moving away from historical references. Greening direct aids.  Rural development: greener and more closely linked to other policies in a common strategic framework. Sustainable growth

6. European Social Fund Cohesion policy  Cohesion to benefit to all, with concentration on less developed MS.  CSF for cohesion, agricultural, rural and fisheries funds.  A contractual agreement between the Commission and the MS reflecting the commitments at national and regional level.  Stronger thematic concentration on the Europe 2020 priorities  Options for increasing quality and performance, e.g. through reserves and introducing a certain level competition amongst MS  « Smart specialisation » of programmes rather than overlapping schemes Inclusive growth

7. European Social Fund The right skills for tomorrow’s workforce  ESF reflects new balance in EU economics policy: promote inclusion alongside growth  Targeted investment to foster adaptability, lifelong learning, inclusion, education and training and institutional capacity  Refocus ESF to secure 2020 targets  Devise a European Employment Initiative with joint initiatives in education, employment and integration Inclusive growth

8. European Social Fund  European Globalisation Fund:  Supporting sectors under pressure:  Extended EGF could be put on permanent footing  Help cushion the impact of disruptions on workforce  simplification of procedures Inclusive growth

9. European Social Fund  One visible programme promoting European unity in diversity to integrate cultural programmes and the involvement of young people.  EU Solidarity Fund: broaden the scope and make interventions faster and more effective.  More emphasis on the management of external borders, return policy, asylum and integration of legal immigrants. Citizenship

10. European Social Fund Incentivising the use of resources  Link to discussion on reinforcing economic policy coordination.  Possible introduction of conditionalities defining a specific set of targets on which disbursement of EU funds would depend.  Other options: performance reserves or modulate co-financing rates to performance.  Need to define specific, measurable, achievable, relevant and timed objectives as well as performance indicators. A budget delivering results

11. European Social Fund A MFF structure to reflect priorities – 2 options  A framework reduced to a minimum of (three) headings: Internal expenditure, External expenditure and Administrative expenditure.  Internal expenditure heading possibly divided in four sub- headings: smart growth, sustainable growth, inclusive growth, and citizenship. Duration of the MFF  Commission favours ten year period, but with a substantial mid- term review ("5+5"), possibly facilitated by substantial reserves and margins. A budget delivering results

12. European Social Fund Simplify and minimise administrative burden  Proposal to revise the Financial Regulation contains bold measures for simplified financial rules.  A clear set of common principles for eligibility rules under shared and centralised management should be agreed. Ensuring sound financial management  Need for a common understanding of the tolerable risk of error for different policy areas and proportionality of controls.  Shared management: the system of payments based on a declaration of payments by Member States, rather than on expenditure by beneficiaries could be extended. A budget delivering results

13. European Social Fund The 5th Cohesion Report and its conclusions: Options for the future 1.Enhancing European added value 2.Strengthening governance 3.Streamlining delivery 4.Architecture of the policy

14. European Social Fund 1. Enhancing European added value  Reinforcing strategic programming – translate EU 2020 objectives into investment priorities  Focus resources on limited number of key priorities  Introduce stronger incentives and conditionality  Improving evaluation, performance and results  Stronger emphasis on new financial instruments

15. European Social Fund 2. Strengthening governance  Reinforcing partnership (improve involvement of local and regional stakeholders, social partners, civil society)  Introducing a new dimension: territorial cohesion  Reinforcing territorial co-operation  Developing an ambitious urban agenda  Addressing areas with specific geographical or demographic features

16. European Social Fund  Improving financial management  Reducing the administrative burden  Simplifying financial discipline  Reviewing financial control 3. Streamlining Delivery

17. European Social Fund Full geographical coverage distinguishing between:  Less developed regions  More developed regions  Transition regions  Simpler system – replaces current phasing-out and phasing-in system  Territorial cooperation 4. Architecture

18. European Social Fund In line with the Budget Review:  Focus the ESF on securing the 2020 targets  Greater visibility and predictable funding volumes for the ESF  Contribution to European employment initiative 4. Architecture

19. European Social Fund Questions 1. How could the Europe 2020 Strategy and cohesion policy be brought closer together at EU, national and sub-national levels? 2. Should the scope of the development and investment partnership contract go beyond cohesion policy and, if so, what should it be? 3. How could stronger thematic concentration on the Europe 2020 priorities be achieved? 4. How could conditionalities, incentives and results-based management make cohesion policy more effective? 5. How could cohesion policy be made more results-oriented? Which priorities should be obligatory?

20. European Social Fund Questions 6. How can cohesion policy take better account of the key role of urban areas and of territories with particular geographical features in development processes and of the emergence of macro-regional strategies? 7. How can the partnership principle and involvement of local and regional stakeholders, social partners and civil society be improved? 8. How can the audit process be simplified and how can audits by Member States and the Commission be better integrated, whilst maintaining a high level of assurance on expenditure co-financed? 9. How could application of the proportionality principle alleviate the administrative burden in terms of management and control? Should there be specific simplification measures for territorial cooperation programmes? 10. How can the right balance be struck between common rules for all the Funds and acknowledgement of Funds' specificities when defining eligibility rules? 11. How can financial discipline be ensured, while providing enough flexibility to design and implement complex programmes and projects?

21. European Social Fund Questions 12. How can it be ensured that the architecture of cohesion policy takes into account the specificity of each Fund and in particular the need to provide greater visibility and predictable funding volumes for the ESF and to focus it on securing the 2020 objectives? 13. How could a new intermediate category of regions be designed to accompany regions which have not completed their process of catching up?

22. European Social Fund Timeline  19 October 2010: Budget Review (COM(2010)700)  10 November 2010: Fifth Cohesion Report  11 November 2010 – 31 January 2011: public consultation  31 January/1 February 2011: Cohesion Forum  Spring 2011: Proposal on future financial perspectives  Summer 2011: Legislative proposals  End 2012: Adoption of new legislative package and expected agreement on new budget post 2013  2013: Finalisation of new programming documents  2014: Entry into force

23. European Social Fund Make your voice heard! Public consultation open until 31 January 2011: ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/cohesion_report Thank you for your attention!

24. European Social Fund European Social Fund More Info WWW.EC.EUROPA.EU/ESF