BEIJING, Dec. 2 (Xinhua) — China is willing to continuously expand the breadth and depth of cooperation with the European Union (EU) to inject new impetus into the development of China-EU comprehensive strategic partnership, Vice Premier Hu Chunhua said Wednesday.
Hu made the remarks when giving a speech at a gala dinner marking the 20th anniversary of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China.
China is willing to work with the EU to implement the consensus reached by the leaders of the two sides, and actively push forward negotiations on the China-EU investment agreement, said Hu.
China hopes that enterprises from both sides will give full play to their complementary advantages and promote cooperation in fields including green industry, digital economy, agriculture, and small and medium-sized enterprises to achieve greater mutual benefits, he said.
Hu also expressed hope that European Union Chamber of Commerce in China continues to play its role as a bridge to make greater contributions in strengthening the exchanges and win-win cooperation between Chinese and European enterprises.
In an exclusive interview with Outlook’s Lachmi Deb Roy, actor-turned-politician Urmila Matondkar talks about her reasons for joining Shiv Sena and her political ideologies.
Excerpts:
Q) What are your reasons for joining Shiv Sena?
When I quit the Congress, I said I am not quitting politics, but I was just quitting the party. I said I would continue to work for the people which I was continuing. Meanwhile, I was also looking at the way the Uddhav Thackrey government was handling the situation in Maharashtra in the past one year. They were thrown into a terrible year of debacles and difficulties which of course included Covid-19 above all. It also handled the difficulties of the farmers in the interiors of Maharashtra. So, along with Covid there were other natural calamities that Maharashtra had to deal with. It was probably one of the most difficult years for Maharashtra.
I admired the way Uddhav Thackeray was holding on and running the government and he came across as an extremely able leader who will be taking everybody along and doing justice to the situation and the people of Maharashtra. So, when I got a call from him asking me to join MLC. He also suggested that Maharashtra which has always been a state which has led the rest of the country on many levels like intellectually and culturally and socially in terms of the social reforms etc. He said that if people like me come to the Vidhan Parishad that will be a beautiful thing for the government and the people of Maharashtra. That struck a chord and I felt that made sense to me because of the kind of work that I was already doing for the people of Maharashtra, now I can do it on a much larger and bigger level if I am supported by a party because if you get party’s support and people’s support on a bigger level, then you are able to do better work.
Q) You quit Congress, what were the reasons behind it?
It’s surprising that the way people are asking that question as if I have quit Congress 14 hours ago. I quit Congress about 14 months ago. It’s been over a year that I have quit it, I don’t want to go into the details of it now because I don’t want to give flak to Congress leadership. I still have a lot of regard for Sonia Gandhi and Rahul Gandhi and in Maharashtra people like Balasaheb Thorat. But there were definitely issues that I went through a post-election process which were very disheartening and extremely discouraging as a newcomer who needed a lot of support, which I didn’t get at that time from the party.
Q) Political ideologies that you like about Shiv Sena…
I come from an extremely socialist and secular kind of a background. But I feel the whole meaning of “Hindutva” has somewhere lost its whole meaning and it’s been used so callously and carelessly that it seems that people have kind of forgotten the meaning of it. Being secular doesn’t mean that you will have complete disrespect or hatred towards religion or god or any religious rituals. It just means co-existence. Words like “Hindutva” have been used in such a bad light by certain people to serve the vested interest of certain people. Hindu dharma is not just a religion, it’s a way of life. It teaches you to lead your life and take it to the best part of yourself. It’s always been a religion of tolerance and universal acceptance. It has always been all inclusive and Hinduism I would say is the most tolerant of all the religions of the world. But unfortunately, that whole concept has been taken and made into “this is not Hindutva vs that is not Hindutva”. And people have also come up with strange concepts like hard Hindutva and soft Hindutva. All these things have no meaning and what I want to do come from co-existence of all religions. When I was in Congress also, I believed that my religion doesn’t teach me to hate other religions. It teaches me to respect my religion above all. If you see the way Maha Vikas Agadhi and Shiv Sena have dealt with issues of Maharashtra, I think that itself is self-explanatory. I want to serve the people of Maharashtra irrespective of what caste, language or religion a person comes from. That has been my simple philosophy and I am not going to back off from it. That is something that I always stood by and will always stand by in the future even if I am in a strongly Hindutva-oriented party.
Q) How happy are you being a part of the Shiv Sena’s women’s wing?
I am extremely happy to be a part of Shiv Sena in general because of Shiv Sainik and the women of Shiv Sena because that is the biggest strength of Shiv Sena. Fighting social injustice in any part of Maharashtra is my aim and that is what I intend to do being a part of this party.
There is no scarcity of the issues that I am going to fight for. The government at the Centre is only concentrating on everything else except for the core issues of the country. However, we cannot just keep crying over that and we need to start working from somewhere.
For me, women’s issues and children issues are extremely important. There is so much that needs to be done in terms of women’s health facilities, hygiene facilities and economic independence and children simply because they are the future. And also, Maharashtra is the land of Mahatma Phule and his wife Savitribai Phule, who then worked for the education of the people. Education has always been a very core and important part of Maharashtra and that needs to reach to the kids and poor children of Maharashtra on a much bigger level.
Q) Going back to Bollywood, we last saw you in ‘Blackmail’ in 2018, do you miss the entertainment industry? We miss seeing our Rangeela girl on the big screen.
Movies and working in films have always been my first love and having said that politics is something that is going to take way more time, energy and focus because it is a new line for me. But again, I am not missing working in films because the challenges in politics are huge and the situation and circumstances that we are working in is very poisonous and it is sad that the political scenario in India has hit an all-time low. It’s really in bad shape. I have seen the old footages of Parliament or Vidhan Sabha where people in Opposition are friends, they may criticise each other and can have ideological differences, but today there seems to be no boundaries as to where the criticisms should stop. The challenges of working in politics are going to be so huge that I don’t see getting into the movie business for now.
<div><hr/>
<b><i>For in-depth, objective and more importantly balanced journalism, <a href="https://magazine.outlookindia.com/subscription?utm_source=story_page" rel="nofollow">Click here</a> to subscribe to Outlook Magazine </i></b>
<hr/>
</div>
… rethink of the link between religion and human rights. Protests … situating the global threat of religion-based human rights abuses.
… religious believers to value their religion, their holy book, their … Author Leo Igwe
The post Religion and Human Rights Abuses: …
<em>“But even in a pandemic, the Constitution cannot be put away and forgotten.”</em><br/>— <a href="/topics/supreme-court/">Supreme Court</a> of the United States, Nov. 25, 2020
When teaching law students about the Bill of Rights, professors often ask on the first day of class which is the first freedom protected by the First Amendment. The students invariably answer, “freedom of speech.” It is not. If the framers were trying to tell us which freedom is the first among equals, they did so by listing the religion clauses ahead of the freedom of speech.
The religion clauses prohibit the government from respecting the establishment of religion and from interfering with its free exercise.
This is not an academic issue. Recent events have demonstrated that the free exercise of religion is as threatened today as it was in 1791, when the First Amendment was ratified. Numerous state governors have targeted the free exercise of religion in their multifaceted assaults on personal liberty in the name of public safety. Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court put a stop to one of them.
Here is the backstory.
<a href="/topics/andrew-m-cuomo/">Andrew M. Cuomo</a> is the governor of New York. He has been foremost among his gubernatorial colleagues in his ubiquitous television explanations of his various executive orders restricting personal liberty during the COVID–19 pandemic. He even won an Emmy for his hundreds of television appearances during which he educated the viewing public on his understanding of the science behind the pandemic.
He attempted to educate the public, as well, on his understanding of the U.S. Constitution. That understanding is wanting.
Mr. <a href="/topics/andrew-m-cuomo/">Cuomo</a> established a color-coded system to indicate the severity of the COVID-19 infection rate by ZIP code. Red is the most severe and calls for limiting worship to 10 people per indoor venue. Orange is the next level, and it limits worshippers to 25.
Since the governor did not deem the right to worship as “essential,” even though he deemed campgrounds and bicycles, food and liquor shops to be essential, he imposed his 10- or 25-person limit on all houses of worship, irrespective of the size of the venue. He imposed no numerical limitations on essential venues.
<a name="pagebreak"/>
Thus, a small mom and pop liquor store could be packed to the gills with customers, but a 400-seat synagogue or a 1,200-seat cathedral would still be limited to 10 or 25 people. This was such an interference with the free exercise of religion that the Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn, New York, and three Jewish congregations in New York City collectively sued the governor in federal court in Brooklyn. They lost. Last week, the <a href="/topics/supreme-court/">Supreme Court</a> interceded in a splendid 5-4 decision that defended religious liberty in the face of government efforts to sweep it aside.
The court recognized that the right to worship is fundamental — and has been the law of the land for many generations. Yet, its characterization as “fundamental” was a shot across the governor’s bow because, whatever he considers the freedom to worship to be, he ordered that it was not essential. The court held that by failing to characterize it as essential, while characterizing other choices as essential, Mr. <a href="/topics/andrew-m-cuomo/">Cuomo</a> demonstrated a hostility to religion.
Stated differently, if having more than 10 or 25 people in a large synagogue or church is likely to harm public health, then why is having 500 people in a Walmart or folks packed like sardines in a liquor store not likely to impair public health?
Because the religion clauses are articulated in the First Amendment — and because the freedom to worship is a natural right — the government can only interfere with them by meeting a demanding jurisprudential test called strict scrutiny. This mandates that the government must have a compelling state interest it is attempting to serve by the least-restrictive means.
It also means that a fundamental right cannot be targeted when other rights that may or may not be fundamental are left to individual choices.
The <a href="/topics/supreme-court/">Supreme Court</a>’s ruling, which was released at 2:12 a.m., was a response to an emergency application. After the plaintiffs lost at the trial court, they asked the trial judge to enjoin the governor during the pendency of their appeal so their congregants could worship during the coming holidays. The court declined. Then the plaintiffs asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for a temporary injunction until that court could hear their appeal. It declined.
Then the plaintiffs threw their Hail Mary pass and asked the <a href="/topics/supreme-court/">Supreme Court</a> to enjoin Mr. <a href="/topics/andrew-m-cuomo/">Cuomo</a> during the pendency of their appeal.
That pass ended up being a touchdown with no time left on the clock. The <a href="/topics/supreme-court/">Supreme Court</a> not only issued an injunction preventing the governor from limiting the number of worshippers at the religious venues that sued, but it did so in such sweeping, liberty-embracing language that will surely apply to all religious venues in the land.
Reading the court’s decision, and particularly the thoughtful and brilliant concurrence by Justice Neil Gorsuch — who wrote that “government is not free to disregard the First Amendment in times of crisis” — one can see that Mr. <a href="/topics/andrew-m-cuomo/">Cuomo</a> lost this case because while he may understand the science, he does not understand the jurisprudence.
Freedom of religion is not the first freedom by mistake. It was the judgment of the framers that this freedom is as essential to human fulfillment as are any other free choices that free people make.
By failing to recognize that natural, historic and jurisprudential truism, Mr. <a href="/topics/andrew-m-cuomo/">Cuomo</a> doomed his executive order to the ash bin of history.
<em>• Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is a regular contributor to The Washington Times. He is the author of nine books on the U.S. Constitution.</em>
<div id="newsletter-form-story">
<div class="block-content" id="opinion-signup-block">
<h3 class="block-title">Sign up for Daily Opinion Newsletter</h3>
</div>
</div>
(Photo: Presbyterian Church in Cameroon)Participants of the workshop on Peaceful conflict resolution and sustainable peace, organized by the Ecumenical Forum on the Anglophone Crisis in Cameroon.
When a group of Cameroonian religious leaders from both English and French-speaking communities, both Christian and Muslim, met to discuss the crisis in the Anglophone western provinces of Cameroon, they committed themselves to being “diplomats of peace.”
The two-day capacity building workshop on Peaceful Conflict Resolution and Sustainable Peace, organized by the Ecumenical Forum on the Anglophone Crisis in Cameroon, sought to raise up a prophetic voice for the troubled country. Present were Protestants, Pentecostals, Roman Catholics, Evangelicals and Muslims.
During their meeting in Buea on Nov. 25-27, they heard an encouraging speech from Dr. Lesmore Gibson Ezekiel, director of the Peace, Diakonia and Development Department of the All Africa Conference of Churches, based in Nairobi, the World Council of Churches reported.
“This sends a clear signal to the world that our religious leaders, Christian and Muslims are committed to the cause of peace, justice, tranquility, reconciliation, and healing in Cameroon,” said Ezekiel.
“We hope in the nearest future that some of you that are participating will be our envoys of peace to other countries, where they are also experiencing turbulence.”
The workshop brought together Christians and Muslims leaders from the Anglophone and Francophone regions, and was convened by Rev. Fonki Samuel Forba in his capacity as president of the Council of Protestant Churches in Cameroon.
Cameroon’s 27 million people have two official languages—English and French—but the people in the two linguistic groups are divided, adding to the nation’s woes and for the concerns of its religious leaders.
They also face another affliction—violent extremist groups such as Boko Haram.
Created in 1961 by the unification of a British and a French colony, the modern state of Cameroon has struggled to find peace and unity.
The mainly Muslim far north has also been affected by the regional Islamist insurgency of the Boko Haram group.
LEADERS OF ALL DENOMINATIONS
During the meeting, one church member wrote on the meeting’s Facebook page, “This is the first time that religious leaders of all denominations in Cameroon are coming together.
“Now that the church is united, God will act in favour of peace. Thank you, Rt. Rev., moderator. May God bless you.”
The meeting was also facilitated by experts like Dr. William Arrey, Rev. Charles Berahino and Eugene Ngalim.
The gathering focused on the causes of conflicts, the role of religious leaders in fighting extremism, religious diplomacy, reconciliation, tolerance and living together.
The workshop sought to encourage and equip the participants to speak publicly and diplomatically to contribute to peace in their communities, the nation and continentally.
LISTENING TO THE OTHER
Those present also acknowledged the importance of people being able to admit to their own faults and listening to the other.
In his address, Ezekiel said that diplomacy is a tool that if used correctly can facilitate “the deepening of the culture of peace in Cameroon and indeed, in the continent of Africa.”
“So, diplomacy is a critical tool that we can engage, and if we utilize it rightly, it will lead to overcoming violence and deepening the culture of peace.
“Therefore, we will together reflect on diplomacy and how best we can utilize this tool in our peacebuilding interventions in Cameroon.”
Ezekiel said diplomacy can occur in multiple forms or ways, that engage various participants ranging from non-state actors to academics, to policymakers and religious leaders.
“You can engage as a non-state actor, as a religious leader, because you are designed to build trust.”
“And that’s where trust guides the conversation in diplomacy,” said Ezekiel. While religious diplomacy is not fundamentally different from regular diplomacy, Ezekiel explained that: “What it brings is that faith imperative, some imprints of religion into the conversation.
“So, the key actors in this form of diplomacy and personalities have clear faith and religious identity that guides their negotiation for peace,” he said.
“So, anybody that is a religious diplomat will always come into the conversation and negotiation, informed by your religious ethos, by your religious doctrines, by your teachings.”
Ezekiel also suggested that maybe people in Cameroon need to learn from African traditional religion. “How is it that they were so tolerant that they accepted Islam and Christianity into Africa?”
Grace Christian Academy is hosting a Virtual Children’s Book Fair through Friday, Dec. 4. The fair, located here, is designed to help young readers discover new books and raise funds to support the school’s tuition assistance programs.
China has overtaken the U.S. to become the EU’s biggest trade partner while the rest of the world slides into the red due to the Covid-19 pandemic.
The country pushed past the United States in the third quarter to become the European Union‘s top trade partner, as the pandemic disrupted the US while Chinese activity rebounded.
Over the first nine months of 2020, trade between the EU and China totalled 425.5 billion euros ($514 billion), while trade between the EU and the United States came in at 412.5 billion euros, according to Eurostat data.
China has overtaken the U.S. to become the EU’s biggest trade partner while the rest of the world slides into the red due to the Covid-19 pandemic. Above, a worker in a motorcycle parts factory in Huaibei, in China’s eastern Anhui Province
These figures show the year-on-year change in GDP for some of the world’s richest countries, with China’s economy larger than it was a year ago while others have seen massive decline
For the same period in 2019, the EU’s trade with China came in at 413.4 billion euros and 461 billion euros with the US.
Eurostat said the result was due to a 4.5 percent increase in imports from China while exports remained unchanged.
‘At the same time trade with the United States recorded a significant drop in both imports (-11.4 percent) and exports (-10.0 percent),’ Eurostat said.
The EU has been China’s top trade partner since 2004 when it overtook Japan, but this is the first time the inverse has been true, France’s Insee statistics agency said Wednesday.
After a Covid-19-related shock in the first quarter the Chinese economy has rebounded, with the economy growing year-on-year in the third quarter.
Insee said Chinese imports from Europe picked up in the third quarter, while purchases of personal protective equipment had boosted Chinese exports.
China’s economy has grown 4.9 percent in the last quarter from last year proving the country is back to its pre-pandemic trajectory with consumer spending and industrial production going back to normal levels. Employees work in a production line at a wigs factory in Hezhang County, Guizhou Province of China on October 16
Workers are seen during the production process of wind turbines during a government organised tour at Goldwind Technology in Yancheng, in Jiangsu province on October 14
China’s economy has grown 4.9 per cent in the third quarter from last year proving the country is back to its pre-pandemic trajectory with consumer spending and industrial production going back to normal levels.
The figures are far more favourable than the dire economic data coming out of most Western countries, showing how China has bounced back quickly despite being the first country to suffer the coronavirus outbreak.
As the virus spread across the globe, China started to bring the outbreak under control and began to reopen its economy, growing 6.8 per cent in the first quarter of this year, and 3.2 per cent in the April-June quarter.
China has been widely condemned for its handling of coronavirus.
After initially covering up the outbreak, Beijing obscured an investigation into how it started and published infection rates which have been widely questioned and partly blamed for the West’s slow response to prepare for the pandemic.
Since China fought off the outbreak, Chinese firms have taken advantage of their good fortune while their global rivals grapple with reduced manufacturing capacity.
Chinese firms have benefited from strong global demand for masks and medical supplies, with exports rising 9.9 per cent in September from a year earlier while factory activity also picked up.
The country’s technology sector has also taken advantage of the work-from-home phenomenon with apps including DingTalk and WeChat bringing in huge revenues.
Now the International Monetary Fund is projecting China’s economy to expand by 1.9 percent in 2020 which means it’ll be the only major world economy to grow this year.
It comes as a new study that found traces of coronavirus in US blood samples from December last year is adding to the growing evidence that the virus was circulating for months before China announced its existence, casting more shadows over the truth about the pandemic and fuelling suspicions of a cover-up by Beijing.
Claims the global outbreak began in a livestock market in Wuhan last winter have crumbled in the face of scientific evidence proving the virus was all over the Western world weeks and even months before China declared the first cases to the World Health Organization on December 31.
Research published on Monday revealed that 39 blood samples taken between December 13 and 16 last year in California, Oregon and Washington state had tested positive for Covid antibodies, meaning the people who gave them had been infected weeks earlier.
The evidence is the earliest trace so far of the virus on US soil, and a further 67 samples from between December 30 and January 17 tested positive in Connecticut, Iowa, Massachusetts, Michigan, Rhode Island and Wisconsin.
It adds to a growing body of proof that the virus had spread thousands of miles outside of China long before its existence was acknowledged. Scientists in Italy say they now have proof the virus was there in September 2019, traces of it were found in Brazil in November, a French hospital patient had it in his lungs in December, and the virus was present in sewage in Spain in January.
With their veto of the EU budget and pandemic recovery package, Poland and Hungary have brought the European Union to one of its worst impasses in years. EU officials have long been in conflict with the governments of Poland and Hungary, accusing them of flouting the rule of law and anti-democratic tendencies.
In turn, officials from those countries accuse the European Union of aiming to punish them politically because they do not conform to the liberal ideals espoused by the the EU. At a meeting on Monday, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki and his Hungarian counterpart, Viktor Orban, reaffirmed their veto and are now waiting for a compromise proposal from Germany, which, until the end of December, holds the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union.
The official reason put forth by the governments of Poland and Hungary for their veto is the Rule of Law Mechanism, which would give the European Union a tool for sanctioning violations of stated democratic principles by cutting aid more quickly than is currently permitted. This would only apply to violations of the rule of law that involve the misuse of EU funds — including irregular public tenders. In July, the governments of Poland and Hungary appeared to have agreed to the mechanism. Now, however, officials say it was changed from the provisions to which they’d originally agreed.
There have, in fact, been slight changes to the draft. The most important stipulates that the mechanism can be set in motion as soon as the serious risk of misuse of EU funds is identified; a previous version stipulated that the misuse must have occurred. A significant obstacle was included to enforcement, however: Sanctions require the agreement of at least 15 member states whose populations total at least 65% of the European Union’s overall.
The governments of Poland and Hungary have argued that the Rule of Law Mechanism violates the Lisbon Treaty and undermines the very principles that it purports to enforce rather than strengthening them. Officials from the countries have not, however, specified which provisions of the Lisbon Treaty the mechanism violates. They also argue that the wording of the Rule of Law Mechanism is vague and unclear, which could ultimately make it a political tool to be used against disobedient member states.
The 14-page draft of the Rule of Law Mechanism clearly defines when and under what circumstances it can be applied. It seems unlikely that the European Union would use the mechanism as a political weapon — in recent years, the bloc has been very defensive and cautious in disputes about the rule of law.
Morawiecki has said the term “rule of law” is “propaganda” that reminds him of the Communist era. Orban has been publicly skeptical of concepts of rule of law, saying the mechanism would mean a “new Soviet Union.” He charged that it was invented as a punitive measure for EU member states that refuse to extend the right of asylum to displaced people. The statements are most likely aimed at domestic audiences as the mechanism has nothing to do with EU migration policy.
Critics say the two countries are opposed to the Rule of Law Mechanism because it threatens their corrupt and nontransparent allocation of EU funds. In Hungary, the misappropriation of subsidies is a major problem. In fact, Hungary heads the list: From 2015 through 2019, the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) identified 43 cases of misappropriation of EU funds, representing 3.93% of subsidies paid to Hungary during that period. OLAF investigated 235 cases over those years across the entire European Union that amounted to 0.34% of all EU subsidies. Hungary’s proportion of misused funds was over 10 times the EU average — and the number of incidences that were not uncovered could be much higher.
EU funds are very often awarded to Orban’s relatives or their associates. Tenders for projects to be financed with EU cash are sometimes tailored specifically for them. Hungarian law enforcement agencies often do not implement OLAF’s recommendations — they do not launch fraud investigations.
In Poland, the system is less overtly corrupt. OLAF identified 22 cases of misappropriation of EU funds from 2015 through 2019, amounting to 0.12% of the money from the European Union.
Though Deputy Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski, the leader of Poland’s ruling Law and Justice (PiS), presents himself as a modest and incorruptible politician, there have been cases of suspected graft close to the party. ARMIR, the state agency responsible for paying out agricultural subsidies, has been repeatedly linked to corruption. As political control over the judiciary increases in Poland, so does the danger that such cases will be less rigorously investigated.
Funded by EU
Poland and Hungary have benefited enormously from subsidies since they joined the European Union in 2004. The funds are important to the economies of both countries. In 2018, payments from the EU accounted for 3.43% of the gross national product in Poland and 4.97% in Hungary.
The Finance Ministry has estimated that a quarter of Poland’s growth over the past half decade is attributable to EU aid. Thanks to funding from Brussels, 600,000 jobs have been created. And, following the country’s accession to the European Union, Poland has received foreign investment totaling over €200 billion ($240 billion) so far.
In 2019, Poland got €12.1 billion from the European Union and Hungary brought in €5.1 billion — making the countries, respectively, the No. 1 and No. 2 net recipients of EU funds. Poland and Hungary are also expected to remain in the top group of net recipients in the budget period 2021-27.
The coronavirus pandemic has brought a sharp decline in growth in both countries this year; estimates put the figure at 4%-8%. The European Union’s coronavirus recovery fund would compensate for a large part of these losses — with recipient nations able to repay indirectly through fees and taxes on carbon and financial transactions.
Prime Minister Orban said Hungary would take out loans on the international financial market if it did not participate in the reconstruction program. In the long run, this would place a much greater burden on Hungary’s economy than participating in the EU’s pandemic recovery plan.
8 billion EUR earmarked for European territorial cooperation
More resources to climate and social issues
Increased support for small projects
On Wednesday, EU institutions reached a provisional agreement on European territorial cooperation and the financing of cross-border projects for 2021-2027.
The total resources available for cross-border cooperation for the period 2021-2027, through the EU Interreg instrument, are set at 8 billion EUR (8 050 000 000 in 2018 prices).
Interreg will support the following types of actions (referred to as “strands”):
cross-border cooperation between adjacent regions to promote integrated and harmonious regional development between neighbouring land and maritime border regions (Interreg A; 72,2% of total resources);
transnational cooperation over larger transnational territories or around sea-basins (Interreg B; 18,2%);
interregional cooperation to reinforce the effectiveness of cohesion policy (Interreg C; 6,1%);
outermost regions’ cooperation to facilitate their integration and harmonious development in their region (Interreg D; 3,5%).
The co-financing rate at each Interreg programme level is set at a maximum of 80% of the funds to be provided by the EU, with up to 85% for outermost regions.
Other key measures agreed
More resources are expected to be spent on climate action and social programmes, including public health;
Increased support for small projects and people-to-people projects: up to 20% within an Interreg programme may be allocated to small project funds;
Pre-financing levels (funds made available to member states following the approval of the Interreg programmes) are set at 1% for the years 2021 and 2022, and at 3% for the years 2023 to 2026, resulting in more liquidity for programmes.
Quote
Rapporteur Pascal Arimont (EPP, BE) said: “Interreg is an important symbol for cooperation between neighbours. It significantly helps remove border obstacles – above all, those in people’s minds.”
“As a result of these negotiations, we enable regions to cooperate more easily – i.e. through simplified rules and procedures. In particular, small and people-to-people projects will be supported more strongly than ever.”
“We are also addressing the challenges of our time: regions have to invest in projects that tackle climate change or strengthen our health systems. As a consequence, together with the increased opportunities offered by REACT-EU, there will be many new possibilities for our regions to invest in sustainable and socially valuable cross-border projects in the future.”
Next steps
Parliament and Council are now expected to endorse the content of the agreement.
Background
The regulation lays down the specific provisions for the European territorial cooperation goal (Interreg) supported by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Social Fund (ESF+) and the Cohesion Fund for the 2021-2027 programming period.
Under the future Common Provisions Regulation, five policy objectives are identified: (1) a more competitive and smarter Europe; (2) a greener, low-carbon transitioning towards a net zero carbon economy and resilient Europe; (3) a more connected Europe; (4) a more social and inclusive Europe; (5) a Europe closer to its citizens.
