URGENT BUSINESS

For Decision

Committee:                 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PLANNING, TOURSIM AND LEISURE SERVICES SELECT COMMITTEE

                                   EXECUTIVE

Date:                          25 AND 26 FEBRUARY 2002

Title:                           PETITION TO THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

                                   REPORT OF HEAD OF PAID SERVICE AND THE PORTFOLIO HOLDER FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, UK AND EU AND REGIONAL ISSUES

SUMMARY/PURPOSE

This report will be discussed as urgent business, by the Economic Development, Planning, Tourism and Leisure Services Select Committee on Monday 25 February 2002 and then by the Executive at the meeting on the Tuesday 26 February 2002. Discussions at the Select Committee will be verbally reported to the Executive the day after.

This report seeks the support of the Select Committee and the Executive for the submission of a Petition to the European Parliament in pursuit of the Island’s claim for objective status under the EU structural fund regulations.

BACKGROUND

In December 1998 the Council submitted a complaint to the European Ombudsman concerning the decision of Eurostat not to classify the Island as a separate Level 2 area in the NUTS system of statistical classification.

The significance of this decision is considerable. Had the Island been granted Level 2 status we should have automatically qualified for Objective 1 status under the structural fund regulations and also maintained our entitlement to Regional Selective Assistance funding from the UK Government. Such status would have attracted significant EU funding.

In March 2000 the Ombudsman found that the European Commission had failed to demonstrate that it had taken into account all relevant factors in reaching its decision on the NUTS level classification for the Island. Accordingly, the Commission were requested to reconsider the matter.

The Commission duly complied with the recommendation of the Ombudsman. However, having reconsidered the Island case for Level 2 status the Commission concluded that there were no grounds for amending the original decision. In March 2001 the Ombudsman concluded that the case was closed on the basis that the Commission had complied with his earlier recommendation and had acted properly within the scope of their legal powers.

In April 2001 the Council lodged a further complaint with the Ombudsman alleging that the Commission had supplied incorrect information to the Ombudsman during his investigation into the original complaint. In February 2002 the Ombudsman issued his decision on this further complaint finding there to be no case of maladministration to answer.

However in his decision, the Ombudsman made the following observation:

“….the complainant could pursue his claim to NUTS level 2 status for the Isle of Wight by presenting a petition to the European Parliament, which can take political and moral arguments into account as well as legal ones.”

ACTION PROPOSED

It is recommended that the Council continue to pursue the case for NUTS Level 2 status for the Island through submission of a formal Petition to the European Parliament.

This will require submission of a detailed report setting out the technical, legal, political and moral basis of the Island case. The Petition is submitted to the President of the European Parliament who will forward the complaint to the Petitions Committee. Subject to the Petition being deemed admissible, the Committee will decide what action should be taken.

Depending on the circumstances, the Petition may be:

·    Forwarded to the European Commission (which obtains the relevant information and sends it to the Committee on Petitions).

·    Forwarded by the President of the European Parliament to the appropriate national authorities.

·    Made the subject of a parliamentary report which is submitted to Parliament in plenary session.

·    Forwarded to the Council of Ministers and/or the European Commission accompanied by an opinion of the Committee on Petitions.

·    Referred to other committees of the European Parliament for information, for further action or for an opinion.

CONCLUSION

The significance of this issue for the Island is considerable. The Council has played an active part in raising the profile of island communities within the European Union. This resulted in the Amsterdam Treaty of 1997 which formally recognises the special needs of islands. However, the wording of the Treaty is not robust enough to place a legal obligation on the European Commission and member states to act in favour of islands. By petitioning the Parliament it will maintain awareness of the “island issue” and support the work we are doing with the Islands Commission, of which the Council is a member, to have the relevant Articles in the Treaty amended at the Inter-Governmental Conference in 2004 to ensure future positive action in favour of islands. Furthermore, as a result of the Council’s efforts the European Commission has recently commissioned consultants to undertake a detailed assessment of the needs of Island communities.

Were a Petition to the European Parliament to result in the Island being granted NUTS Level 2 status we should also qualify for Objective 1 status, thereby securing considerable additional funding to support economic development and regeneration activities.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

None – the Petition will be developed and submitted by staff of the Economic Development Unit

BACKGROUND PAPERS

European Ombudsman file

Contact point: John Bentley, Head of Economic Development

                                   Telephone 01983 823346