Donaustrategie gaat implementatiefase in (en)

EU affairs ministers of Member States are expected to give the green light to the macro-regional strategy for the development of the Danube Region, at a meeting on 13 April 2011. The Presidency is through with discussions on strategy plans and can move forward to prepare the specific programs, Etelka Barsi-Pataki, Hungary’s government commissioner for the Danube Strategy, said to eu2011.hu.

The General Affairs Council will put the Danube Region Strategy (DRS) on the agenda of its plenary session on 13 April. The ministers are expected to adopt conclusions on the issue. Does this mean the Hungarian Presidency has achieved its goals concerning the strategy?

Yes, the DRS has reached a milestone. Thanks to the Presidency’s groundwork, Member States have agreed on the main principles and first steps of the strategy, which ministers are likely to approve on 13 April. This will complete the Hungarian Presidency’s main goal to negotiate a political agreement between Member States on this issue. This mutual agreement promises a liveable and prosperous Danube region, which will be implemented as part of a long-term joint European agreement.However, the Hungarian Presidency has also agreed to prepare the launch of the DRS. Our goal in the region, is to reach obvious and palpable results on regional cooperation as early as the end of this year, and in thisrespect we must not delay.

On the Europe Day at the beginning of May, we will meet our European partners in Gödöllo for a high-profile Presidency meeting, to discuss the implementation of the strategy. We have further goals, and I hope I can report more results as early as in June, before the Hungarian Presidency ends.

As you mentioned earlier, the final document to be approved on 13 April is the result of long term, behind-the-scene discussions. Is the final document unanimously supported by Member States? What areas may be subject to further debates?

The Hungarian Presidency has made great efforts to convince all Member States that the goals regarding the Danube region are common ones. Many discussions were held on this issue, both in Brussels and in the Danube region countries, during the past few months. We hope that this careful preparation will help prevent any serious conceptual conflicts and debates on the strategy in the future.

The implementation of the strategy with its specific programmes and projects is yet to be designed. The Hungarian Presidency has already taken steps in the past few weeks, to lay the groundwork for the implementation of the programmes in cooperation with responsible EU and Member State institutions. Naturally, this process will include practical meetings and discussions for instance on capacity, and schedule.

A key issue will be how we can secure river navigation by considering the Danube’s natural resources. We are making great efforts to promote the implementation of new and different river fleet types instead of digging a deeper river bottom. We are confident that the Hungarian Presidency is prepared to coordinate successfully this process through constructive dialogue.

To what extent does the document elaborated by the Presidency differ from the Commission’s original ideas, which was presented in December 2010?

The Commission’s document published at the end of last year is based on the ideas of countries taking part in the Danube Region Strategy. The presidential document to be discussed by the General Affairs Council, accepts the DRS on this ground and acknowledges the action plan suggested by the European Commission: which speaks about specific measures in eleven special fields. These fields include water management of the Danube and all of its tributaries, common management of the environmental risks in the region, or the sustainable utilisation of energy sources in the countries of the region.

Furthermore, the council document worked out under the leadership of the Hungarian Presidency, identifies it as an important goal of Member States that the strategy should set realistic numerical objectives, in the above mentioned fields. Such objectives highly contribute, among others, to improve the living conditions of citizens in the region, the re-launching of the region’s economy, as well as the conservation of the uniquely valuable water system of the region. The Council intends to step beyond these numerical objectives of the plan outlined in the original commission document.

When speaking to the public, you always mention that the Presidency wants to create “co-ordinated implementation” and not newer bureaucratic levels. What does this mean?

As mentioned above, we find cooperative ambitions in eleven fields in the DRS. In many fields, such cooperation and implementation, are well coordinated beyond their symbolic importance, may have serious results for the region. Such field is for example the transport networks.

Within this strategy, we will be able to make a common decision at macro-regional level, about the most important transport corridors in the Danube Region to which we will allocate sources in the next financial planning period. If we manage to coordinate the planning and the usage of the sources well enough, e.g. in the case of the missing North-South connections, it could improve the competitiveness of the region.

As a macro-regional cooperation, the DRS has only one predecessor, and that is the Baltic Sea Region Strategy. This cooperation started in 2006, although its implementation actually began in 2009, under the Swedish Presidency’s term. Are there any experiences that the Union can rely on in the DRS?

The first experiences of the Baltic Sea Region Strategy are currently under evaluation; therefore, the first results are not available for us just yet. We certainly have consulted with our Baltic counterparts on a number of occasions about their practical experiences. That is amongst the goals of the above-mentioned high-level Presidential conference at Gödöllo in May. It should be added however, that many elements of the DRS are being elaborated by us, on the basis of our own views, and this is the great challenge for the partners taking part in this work.