Rapporteur: Llibert CUATRECASAS (Spain)

---------------------------

EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM

I. INTRODUCTION

1. CHANGES IN THE REGIONAL PHENOMENON OVER THE LAST 30 YEARS

When taking stock of the weight of European regions with legislative power, as at the Barcelona and Liège Conferences, it is important to assess the gradual process of consolidating regional realities that is taking place in Europe and to pinpoint its salient features. The first fact to note is that the regionalisation process is developing in parallel to the increasing desire for European union, and that the process derives from a public culture with which European citizens are gradually identifying.

The main components of this culture were established by the Council of Europe, in pursuit of its fundamental aim of achieving a greater unity between the peoples of Europe on the basis of the European Convention on Human Rights, the Convention on Transfrontier Co-operation, the European Charter of Local Self-Government, the future European Charter of Regional Self-Government and the Convention on Regional or Minority Languages, as well as many other texts which have been incorporated into member states’ domestic law. The principles of pluralism, subsidiarity and participative democracy at local and regional levels are a political reality very different from that which prevailed in most countries for the first half of the 20th century.

It should be remembered that this legal acquis by the first European institution, without which the acquis communautaire and even the present reality of the European Union would be very different, represents a fundamental constant during the constitutional debate currently being conducted by the European Union. It is against this background that the regionalisation process in Europe has made decisive progress over the last thirty years. We can now assert that regional structures based on different state decentralisation models exist in virtually all sizeable European countries. The European federal states are no longer regarded as isolated cases, but can be seen as particular models exemplifying a specific type of regional political structure.

Such countries as Spain, Belgium and Italy have set up regions with legislative power. Italy in particular has radically reformed its Constitution to upgrade its regions’ attributions, in particular giving them genuine legislative power within their particular fields of competence.

Lastly, some central and eastern European countries have revolutionised their regional geography with a series of new regions: this has been the case in the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic and Poland, the latter having reinforced regional self-government by reducing the number of new regions. They have launched their democratisation, regionalisation and European integration processes simultaneously, which is in fact no coincidence.

So we can say that regionalism (with particular reference to regions with legislative power) has been undergoing an unprecedented boom over the past few decades.

2. HOW THE INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS REFLECT THIS DEVELOPMENT

2.1 The Council of Europe - institutional evolution of the Congress

In 1975, as part of this general trend, the Permanent Conference of Local Authorities of Europe decided to open its doors to the regions, and changed its name to also include regional authorities.

The Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe succeeded the Permanent Conference in 1994, becoming a consultative organ of the Council of Europe. The Congress constitutes a major innovation as regards regionalism, because it comprises two chambers, namely the Chamber of Local Authorities and the Chamber of Regions. This is a further reflection of the need for representation of local and regional authorities, and above all, it corresponds to the rebirth of the regional phenomenon in Europe. In 2000 the Congress adopted a revised version of its Charter with a reinforced affirmation of the regional presence in its midst.

2.1.1 The Chamber of Regions: changing membership

The original plan had been to set up the Chamber of Regions in the form of a Council of Europe partial agreement so that only countries with genuine regions would be involved. However, this idea was rejected and a balanced Congress was created, with two Chambers operating on an equal footing. Even countries with no real regions were allowed to appoint members to the Chamber of Regions. The role of such members was not modified until the 2000 reform, when it was stipulated that they should have a right of discussion only in the Chamber’s sittings.

Moreover, the Chamber of Regions has been asked to co-operate in formulating a draft European Charter of Regional Self-Government. In 1997 it approved the draft Charter which had been submitted to the Chamber of Local Authorities for opinion.

This draft Charter emerged as a result of the Final Declaration of the Geneva Conference in 1993, enabling the new CLRAE to adopt Resolution No. 8 at its first session in June 1994. This resolution invited the Chamber of Regions to draw up such a Charter (based on the European Charter of Local Self-Government, which has so far been signed by 35 Council of Europe member states) in co-operation with the Parliamentary Assembly.

The principle of subsidiarity, which was enshrined for the first time in Article 4.3 of the European Charter of Local Self-Government, consists in assigning the exercise of public responsibilities, in preference, to those authorities which are closest to the citizen. Allocation of responsibility to another authority should weigh up the extent and nature of the task and requirements of efficiency and economy.

This principle, which is expanded upon in Recommendation R (95) 19 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe, comes particularly to the fore in the fourth and sixth paragraphs of the Preamble to the draft European Charter of Regional Self-Government, which addresses it from a fairly broad angle. This principle as applied in each State should concern subsidiarity between not only the Central State and the regions but also the regions themselves and the local authorities within their territory.

The problems encountered in the regionalisation process and future regional issues are regularly debated and have led to the formulation of many conventions and declarations. For instance, the conferences held in Galway in 1975, in Bordeaux in 1978 and Geneva in 1993 all helped flesh out the whole concept of regional self-government.

Lastly, in 1999, with a view to more detailed analysis of the issues relating to regions with legislative power, the Chamber of Regions set up a Working Group on Regions with Legislative Power to prepare a Conference of presidents of such regions.

2.2 European Union: the Committee of the Regions

The Committee of the Regions was set up under the Maastricht Treaty, at the same time as the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe at the Council of Europe. Its main raison d’être is the desire to bring the European Union closer to the citizen. This Committee, which represents local and regional authorities, held its first meeting in March 1994. At that time it was only assigned five compulsory fields for consultation (economic and social consultation, trans-European transport, telecommunications and energy networks public health, education, and youth and culture), followed by four further fields assigned on 1 May 1999, when the Amsterdam Treaty came into force (employment, social policy, vocational training and transport).

One consequence of the enlargement of Europe will be an increase in the membership of the Committee (which currently has 350 members).

Unlike the Congress the Committee of the Regions is a unified body embracing both regions and municipalities, despite its name, and its membership includes many local authority representatives.

3. JUSTIFICATION FOR SETTING UP THE WORKING GROUP ON REGIONS WITH LEGISLATIVE POWER

In 1999 the Congress set up the Working Group on Regions with Legislative Power to study the specific role of such regions vis-à-vis the European institutions, with particular reference to the principle of subsidiarity. The Group’s first terms of reference are reproduced in Appendix 1. The idea for a European Summit of Presidents of Regions with Legislative Power emerged from the work of this Group.

Although the Group is mandated to address issues specifically affecting regions with legislative power, including in the European Union, it has never been conceived as a means of dividing the European regions. On the contrary, its members are keenly aware of the need for solidarity on the part of all European regions in their dealings with governments and the European institutions. In line with this approach, the Bureau of the Chamber of Regions has enlarged the Group’s membership to cover representatives of other regions designated by the Chamber of Regions (in Poland, the Czech Republic and Croatia).

II. THE BARCELONA CONFERENCE (23-24 November 2000)

1. BACKGROUND TO THE CONFERENCE AND CO-OPERATION IN THE CATALONIA REGION

At the initiative of the Generalitat of Catalonia and the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe, and specifically its Chamber of Regions, the first Summit of Presidents of European Regions with Legislative Power was held in Barcelona on 23 and 24 November 2000. The theme of the Summit was the situation of the regions vis-à-vis the development of European unification and globalisation.

Europe is currently seeing a regionalisation process whereby a number of states are systematically attempting to devolve their legislative powers or extend the exercise of such powers to the regions.

The enlargement of the European Union is highlighting the deficit in terms of regional participation in the European decision-making process.

Furthermore, the European public now sees globalisation as a major issue. The regions must help establish an international framework suited to the global market and ensure that they play an appropriate role on this market.

All these considerations, coupled with the work of the Working Group on Regions with Legislative Power, led to the idea of a European Summit of Presidents of Regions with Legislative Power.

2. THE CONFERENCE PROGRAMME

The Conference programme is reproduced in the addendum. In addition to the theme of “European unification from the angle of regions with legislative power”, which was mainly centred on developments in the European Union in the run-up to the Nice Summit, the theme of “the challenge of globalisation for regions with legislative power” concerned an issue involving all the European regions, whether inside or outside the European Union.

3. ATTENDANCE AT THE CONFERENCE

The list of conference participants is reproduced in the addendum. The event was attended by representatives of regions with legislative power from 11 different European countries. The Conference was successful to the extent that 28 Presidents attended in person and 13 further regions were also represented, mostly by elected councillors. This was a clear expression of these Presidents’ interest in improving European consultation on issues relevant to them and of their desire to set up a network in order to optimise their influence on developments in the European Union.

4. CONCLUSIONS OF THE CONFERENCE

At the close of the Barcelona Summit the Presidents of European Regions with Legislative Power agreed on the need for further development of the following items:

4.1 The regional phenomenon and the principle of subsidiarity

· Improving the recognition of the role of the regions and involving them more closely in the European decision-making process;

· Adopting the European Charter of Regional Self-Government as quickly as possible;

· Appropriately applying the principle of subsidiarity to regions with legislative power and clarifying the apportionment of responsibilities.

4.2 Several tiers of cultural identity

· Promoting a European identity, maintaining a national identity and respecting a regional identity;

· Fostering regional cultural diversity as a force in Europe.

4.3 Involvement of the regions in the globalisation process

· Integrating regions with legislative power into the globalisation process in order to enhance its democratic dimension and therefore its legitimacy;

· Developing available regional resources in order to enhance the contribution to sustainable development dynamics;

· Promoting economic and social cohesion by preventing imbalance among regions in terms of distribution of wealth and the new information and communication technologies.

4.4 Promoting inter-regional co-operation

· Setting up a network of Presidents of European Regions with Legislative Power in order to promote inter-regional and transfrontier co-operation so as to improve knowledge of the special interests of such regions at the national and regional levels.

5. IMPLEMENTING THE CONCLUSIONS OF THE BARCELONA CONFERENCE; REACTIONS

Alongside its specified tasks, the Working Group on Regions with Legislative Power has also been endeavouring to implement the conclusions of the Barcelona Conference.

The aim of setting up a network of Presidents can be achieved through the new information and communication technologies. Such a network would be managed by a co-ordinating group comprising representatives of all regions with legislative power.

In the wake of the Barcelona Conference the Congress set up a group of 6 Presidents to manage the network decided on in Barcelona (Baden-Württemberg, Catalonia, Scotland, Tuscany, Tyrol and Wallonia), and began preparing for the second Conference of Presidents of Regions with Legislative Power on the basis of the invitation issued by the President of the Wallonia Region in Barcelona, to be held in Liège on 15 and 16 November 2001 on the occasion of the Belgian Presidency of the European Union.

Concurrently, the Flanders Region continued its efforts to promote a major political declaration by the seven Presidents of “constitutional regions”, ie Bavaria, Catalonia, North-Rhine Westphalia, Salzburg, Scotland, Flanders and Wallonia, issued on 28 May, which defined the concept of regions with legislative power as regions having a legislature as defined in Article 3 of the First Protocol to the European Convention on Human Rights.

III. THE LIEGE CONFERENCE (15-16 NOVEMBER 2001)

1. PREPARATIONS FOR THE CONFERENCE

These initiatives and the special significance of the Belgian Presidency of the European Union, which was to conclude with a European Summit comprising a declaration on the future of Europe, were the decisive factors in finalising this second Conference of Presidents of Regions with Legislative Power.

The Prime Minister of the Wallonia Region undertook to prepare the second conference on the basis of an invitation from the Belgian Presidency of the European Union. In this way Wallonia combined both initiatives into one single project, involving in particular the representatives of the various existing regions in Brussels. The Liège Conference therefore took place just a few weeks before the European Summit in Laeken.

2. ACCENTUATING THE EUROPEAN UNION/GREATER EUROPE DICHOTOMY

At a time of enlargement to the east and south-east of Europe, it cannot be overlooked that the external borders of the European Union are not hard and fast: the Union is destined to open up to more countries which are already members of the European democratic family united in the Council of Europe framework.

In this spirit of openness, and following on from the principles defined at the Barcelona Conference, the regions have been associated with the network set up by the European Union regions through the intermediary of the Congress of Local and Regional Authorities of Europe, and especially through its Working Group on Regions with Legislative Power.

Despite these principles, the Congress’ role in preparing the Liège Conference was merely complementary, the main reason given for this situation being that a Council of Europe institution should not be involved in preparing a conference dealing mainly with the future of the European Union (Laeken Summit, Convention and 2004 Inter-Governmental Conference).

A compromise deal was struck: the first day of the Conference was entirely devoted to European Union issues, and the second day, under the auspices of the Council of Europe, to developments in the Greater Europe.

3. ROLE OF THE BELGIAN PRESIDENCY OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

In accordance with the Declaration on the Future of the European Union, which was adopted at Brussels/Laeken by the Heads of State and Government, the main theme for discussion was reinforcing the role of Regions with legislative power within the European Union. The conclusions of the first day were in fact presented the same evening to the Belgian Prime Minister, Guy Verhofstadt, who undertook to transmit them to the Laeken Summit.

4. CONFERENCE PROGRAMME

The conference programme is reproduced in the addendum. As stated above, the first day of the Conference, which dealt exclusively with the European Union, contrasted starkly with the second day, which concentrated on the Council of Europe and Greater Europe.

Although the links between the two days were tenuous, the principle of organising one conference covering both dimensions was once again preserved. The conclusions reflect this situation, with separate conclusions for each day but with all conclusions appearing in one document, which also refers to the work initiated by the Flanders Region.

Walter Schwimmer, Secretary General of the Council of Europe, made a major contribution to the work of the Conference. The text of his address appears in the addendum.

5. ATTENDANCE AT THE CONFERENCE

The Liège Conference was a renewed success in terms of attendance figures, even if they were slightly lower during the second day. The list of participants is appended to this report.

6. CONTENT, PARTICULARLY THE ERGEC AND PUJOL REPORTS, AND CONCLUSIONS

6.1 The Ergec Report

The report by Professor Ergec on relations between the European Union, its member states and the regions, which had been commissioned by the Wallonia Region, provided the basis of discussing the report presented orally at the Conference by Mr Van Cauwenberghe.

Distribution of competences

The competences of the European Union and its member states are not clearly delimited, and the expansion in Community competences leaves the member states little room for manoeuvre, which is perceived as an infringement of their sovereignty.

Unfortunately, the incorporation of the principle of subsidiarity into the Treaty is insufficient on its own to protect member states from possible extensions of Community competences.

Pointers to the future were identified in order to clarify the apportionment of competences between the Community and its member states. For instance, clarifying the scope of the principle of subsidiarity, reinforcing the “comparative efficiency test” and drawing up lists of concurrent, exclusive and reserved competences might help prevent infringement of national sovereignty by the increasing expansion of Community competences.

Moreover, European integration could be secured by means of such specific techniques as framework legislation, the principle of loyalty to the Community , or the implicit competences technique.

Definition of the concept of “Region”

Although it is hard to provide any simple definition of this concept, regions with legislative power can fairly easily be defined as regional authorities empowered to issue legislative rules in the strict sense of the term, ie laws emanating from a democratically elected body (often referred to as a Parliament).

Regional participation in Community decision-making

Faced with increasing interference by European law n their areas of jurisdiction, the regions are demanding a greater say in the European decision-making machinery. Such increased involvement could be ensured either by member states acting individually (eg reinforcing respect for the institutional autonomy of member states) or by amending certain structures at the European level (eg upgrading the role of the Committee of the Regions, etc).

Furthermore, the 2004 Inter-Governmental Conference (IGC) might finally officially recognise the place and role of regions with legislative power in the European Union. This would necessitate involving the regions in the preparatory work for IGC 2004 and also in IGC negotiations.

The only way to bestow any real autonomy on the regions is to make them directly answerable under the rules of European law governing their fields of competence. Consequently, they should also have direct access to the European Court of Justice.

Regions with legislative power must be driving forces for action at both national and European level. To that end they must lobby for improved representation at both the domestic and the European levels (application of the principle of subsidiarity between the Union and sub-national entities, and promotion of the Council of Europe’s draft European Charter of Regional Self-Government).

6.2 The Pujol Report

The second major report presented at Liège was that prepared by Jordi Pujol, President of the Generalitat of Catalonia, on “Federalism in Greater Europe from the angle of regions with legislative power”.

Development of European regionalism

Regionalism in Europe has undergone considerable change in terms of both the number of decentralised European countries and the extent of the decentralisation effected.

Regionalisation should be understood in the broad sense, and regionalism involves democracy, political expression of cultural identity and also socio-economic development.

There is no single pattern or model for the region, although there are some competences that are held by virtually all regions.

Inter-regional, and particularly transfrontier co-operation is booming, and will be vital for the future development of European regionalism. The Council of Europe’s work in providing a fairly highly developed contractual framework of legal instruments relating to co-operation is particularly important in this connection.

Furthermore, European integration is not confined to the European Union, especially in terms of enlargement to central and eastern Europe. The obvious example here is provided by the Council of Europe.

The main lines and objectives of regional action

The growth of the regional phenomenon means progress towards introducing a standard-setting framework for regionalism. European regional “culture” and inter-regional co-operation must be further developed, as the European Charter of Regional Self-Government only deals with the first stage in this process.

Given that all regions, or at least all those with legislative power, are state entities empowered to act at Community level on the same basis and under the same conditions as the states themselves, they have a part to play in European integration.

It is vital that we involve the regions, either individually or through the State, in the decision-making and implementation processes for Community actions.

6.3 Conclusions

The European Union has always been driven by the desire to reconcile the peoples of Europe and ensure sustainable co-operation in peace-keeping efforts, respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms and prosperity in Europe.

Accordingly, in the current crisis situations in south-east Europe and the Caucasus, the creation of regions, possibly with special legislative powers, could provide a major contribution to identifying the means of restoring peace and democratic stability on a lasting basis.

IV. THE WAY FORWARD

At the second Conference of Presidents of Regions with Legislative Power in Liège, the representatives of Tuscany and Salzburg offered to host the next two conferences, in 2002 and 2003. The Presidents attending the Liège Conference accepted these invitations.

At the same time the Presidents adopted a specific resolution on the procedure for organising co-operation between regions with legislative power. Referring to the Barcelona Declaration, they were thus confirming the desire to establish a network for their future work, extensively drawing on the new information and communication technologies. All the regions must operate on an equal footing. However, they also agreed to set up a co-ordinating group comprising one to four regions with legislative power per state.

This network has since been set up, as follows:

Aland Islands, Bade-Württemberg, Bayern, Catalunya, Extremadura, Pays Basque, Galicia, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Salzburg – Scotland – Tyrol, Tuscany, Flanders, Wales, Piemonte, Basilicata, Calabria

This group has so far only held preparatory meetings, with Senior Officials responsible for preparing the meetings of the Presidents of the regions in question. However, the President of the Tuscany Region, which should be hosting the 3rd Conference in Florence in November 2002, has already made clear to the group that, where the more operational political aspects are concerned, he is hoping to consult with his predecessor, the President of the Wallonia Region, which hosted the second conference, and his successor the President of the Salzburg Region, which is to organise the fourth conference.

Organising this permanent network of Presidents of Regions with Legislative Power is set to be an hard, long-drawn-out task, especially if we consider two criteria which are already clearly emerging:

· Firstly, the determination to ensure that the network is not just another European regional association, with an eye to preserving all the requisite flexibility and direct contacts among the regions and between them and the European institutions;

· Secondly, the need for maximum independence from the two organs representing the regions in the European institutions, namely
a) the Committee of the Regions in the European Union
b) the Congress Chamber of Regions in the Council of Europe.

After the Laeken Summit in December 2001, which launched the discussions on a thoroughgoing reform of the Community institutions in the run-up to the Inter-Governmental Conference in 2004, it was decided to set up a European Union Convention under the presidency of the former French President Valéry Giscard d’Estaing, who is also President of the Council of European Municipalities and Regions. Despite the request put forward in Liège, the regions with legislative power were not given any separate status in this Convention. Nevertheless, it should be noted that five of the six representatives of the Committee of the Regions sitting on this Convention come from regions with legislative power.

The European Union Convention, which is expected to lay the foundations for a future European Constitution, is mainly aimed at affirming and enhancing the role of regions with legislative power, because this role is vital for the implementation of all decisions which are liable to be taken at the European level but which, at the local level, will be dealt with by these regions. Such regions will therefore feel justified in asking the European Union for a right of inspection vis-à-vis any principles formulated for inclusion in a future Constitution, which should comply with the principle of subsidiarity and therefore guarantee respect for the competences of regions with legislative power. It is thus a case of affirming that the principle of subsidiarity applies not only to relations between the European Union and the States but also to relations among the European Union, the States and the Regions with legislative power, as well as more generally with all local and regional authorities.

However, the composition and mode of operation of the Congress are considerably broader than those of the European Union, and this will remain the case even after the latter has undergone its future enlargement. Of course, the initial concern will be to ensure respect for the interests of the regions in applicant countries. Yet the fact is that with very few exceptions (eg the right of the Czech regions to table legislation) none of the countries in question have regions with legislative power.

The picture is very different in Russia, the largest federalist country in Europe, although the Russian Federation does not seem to be intending to apply for European Union membership in the foreseeable future. This makes it important for the Congress to continue and step up its discussions on the future of regions with legislative power in Greater Europe, and particularly on the future of federalism in Russia. This is why a preliminary conference is being held in St Petersburg in April in co-operation with the administration of the Russian President, who has instructed the conference to formulate fresh proposals for implementation of federalism in Russia for mid-2002.

In this context, some Russian regions, including Tatarstan, have taken the very useful initiative of organising conferences in Russia on the evolution of the federal links among the regions with legislative power in this country, as compared with overall European realities. Mr Mukhametshin, President of the State Council of Tatarstan, submitted a proposal to this effect at the Liège Conference. Obviously, such a conference on Russian federalism would add an indispensable “Greater Europe” strand to the preparatory work on the two forthcoming conferences in Tuscany and Salzburg. While the Congress’ limited organisational capacities preclude holding such an event in 2002, we should consider holding it in 2003.

The current terms of reference of the Working Group on Regions with Legislative Power are appended. These terms of reference, approved by the Bureau on 7 March 2001, are fairly restrictive as compared with the previous ones. In any case they will lapse in their present form after the Congress’ 9th session. We would propose extending the working Group’s term of office while amending its terms of reference to ensure a Congress presence at the forthcoming conferences of regions with legislative power scheduled for November in Tuscany and some time in 2003 in Salzburg.

The Group is also planning to launch a study on the desirable apportionment of responsibilities among the European, national and regional levels, with specific reference to regions with legislative power. Such a study would be based on the work already conducted in the Council of European Municipalities and Regions, the Assembly of European Regions and the Committee of the Regions. Above and beyond its importance for regionalisation in central and eastern Europe, this study should also highlight the principles to be followed by the European Union Convention in formulating the main lines of a future European Constitution. The Group’s terms of reference should also include the preparation of this study.

The draft European Charter of Regional Self-Government is the subject of a special report to be presented at the 9th plenary session by Peter Rabe, who presented the first draft Charter at the 1997 session. I would just like to point out that regions with legislative power have been formally recognised in the work carried out by the CDLR on devising a system of classification of regions. This is the case of regions with primary legislative power whose existence is guaranteed by the Constitution or under a Federal Pact and cannot be challenged against their will (model 1 developed in the CDLR basic report as presented at the 28th meeting, Strasbourg, 10-12 December 2001). The same applies to model 2, entitled “Regions which have primary legislative power but whose existence is not guaranteed by the Constitution or under a Federal Pact”. Model 3 also concerns regions with legislative power, and is entitled “Regions with the power to adopt laws in accordance with the framework (principle, general provisions) established by national legislation, whose existence is guaranteed by the Constitution”. Lastly, model 4 concerns “Regions with legislative power in accordance with the framework (principle, general provisions) established by national legislation, whose existence is not guaranteed by the Constitution”. Regions without legislative power are only mentioned from model 5 onwards in the CDLR’s classification.

V. FUTURE PROSPECTS

A united Europe rich with the diversity of its regional structures and the vigour of its regions will be in a better position to play its full role in a living world marked by globalisation. Although this clearly applies to the European Union, and we can only hope that the current process of developing a Constitutional framework within the Convention will contribute to this end, it is equally relevant to the Council of Europe, which today covers the whole European continent, because regionalisation is rapidly developing in its member states, the latest examples being Slovakia and Albania.

The strength of this Europe will depend on the regions’ real capacity for managing a wide range of public affairs under their own responsible, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity and with a constant concern for proximity to the citizen. Regions with legislative power are in the vanguard of this movement, but they maintain their solidarity with the other European regions to which the states in question have not (yet) attributed legislative powers.

We rely on our own work and that of the Barcelona and Liège Conferences to provide our contribution to the “integrated project on democratic institutions in action” which is being conducted by the Council of Europe from 2002 to 2004, under the impetus of the Secretary General, Walter Schwimmer.

Lastly, we must ensure in our future work that the Congress is appropriately associated with the forthcoming Conferences of Presidents of Regions with Legislative Power in Tuscany in 2002 and Salzburg in 2003. Even if the Council of Europe is not really the place for influencing the constitutional development of the European Union, it should not be forgotten that our Organisation has always been the framework for pioneering solutions, many of which have subsequently been incorporated by the European Union. This even goes for the Union’s symbols, including the European Anthem and the flag, which were created by the Council of Europe in 1955. The Recommendation will be proposing fresh terms of reference for the Working Group, which should have its term of office extended and its terms of reference adopted to the Congress’ more restricted but still important role in these conferences.

However, the Congress must also open up to Greater Europe and take part in the discussions there on the future of regionalism and federalism. This explains the Congress’ close involvement in the St Petersburg Conference in April on the apportionment of responsibilities among the various levels of public authorities in Russia. The aim of this event is to help the Russian Federation in the discussions initiated by President Putin and conducted by his Presidential Administration (led by Mr Kozak), with a view to finalising proposals over the first half of this year for restructuring its responsibilities, powers and financial resources within the Council of Europe’s largest member state, the Russian Federation.

By the same token, we cannot but welcome the proposal from the Supreme Council of Tatarstan to organise a meeting of the Presidents of Regions with Legislative Power in the Republic of Tatarstan. Particularly because of the frequent crises in southern Russia and northern Caucasus, such discussions would be extremely useful, being held in the very heart of Russia but also involving examples from the other European countries. Therefore, our Working Group’s future terms of reference should also include preparation of this conference.

During its term of office, in order to take account of the importance of the other European regions, we have also opened up the Working Group to representatives of other European regions from the Chamber of Regions of the Institutional Committee. Naturally, such representatives should also be available for the Group’s future work, following on from Mr Olbrycht (Poland), Mr Dohnal (Czech Republic) and Mr Dorič (Croatia).

The Group should also liaise with the work of UniDem (“University for Democracy”), taking part in the Seminar organised by the latter in Rome on 14 and 15 June on settling disputes between the Central State and Regions with legislative power through the Constitutional Courts. This is a further important aspect of the apportionment of responsibilities between Central States and Regions with Legislative Power.

In conclusion, the Working Group should continue to provide the forthcoming Conferences of Presidents of Regions with Legislative Power with its additional support for the work they wish to carry out and consequently for the political objectives proposed by the Permanent Network under consideration. These efforts must be based on the conviction that it is only through direct dialogue with a European Institution, in this case the Congress Chamber of Regions, that this network of Presidents of Regions with Legislative Power will be able to consolidate its presence and make its voice heard in as effective a manner as possible.

Appendix 1
Regions with legislative power
11 members R + 1 observer + 1 expert

TERMS OF REFERENCE

The Working Group is responsible for :

1. Examining the current situation of regions with legislative power in the member countries of the Council of Europe, their internal organisation, their competencies, finance and their relationships with national and local authorities ;drafting recommendations in these fields.

2. Studying the relationship between regions with legislative power and the European institutions, the application of the principle of subsidiarity and regions’ participation in decision-making processes.

3. Studying, in particular, the role of regions with legislative power in the consultation processes of Council of Europe bodies by the Committee of Ministers and drafting proposals for the latter so that regions with legislative power may be consulted for all questions directly concerning them and, in case of consultation, preparing draft opinions with this aim.

4. Studying the particularities of regions with special status and with legislative power, with a view to drawing up conclusions for political recommendations to solve conflictual situations within the framework of national legislation.

5. Gathering regional representatives from the countries having regions with legislative power (Austria, Germany, Belgium, Italy, Spain, Switzerland, the Russian Federation) and from those having regions with a special status with legislative power (Finland, Moldova, Portugal, United Kingdom, [Ukraine]) with a view to creating a network to promote their (interregional and transfrontier) cooperation and for better diffusing the particular interests of these regions both at national and European levels.

DURATION : 2000

WORKING LANGUAGES : French, English, German, Italian, Russian (if necessary)

NUMBER OF MEETINGS: 2 or 3 per year

COMPOSITION :

AUSTRIA : Mr Freibauer (Titular) and Mr Streiter (Replacement)

GERMANY: Mr Kretschmer (Titular) and Mr Schäuble (Replacement)

BELGIUM : Mr Van Cauwenberghe (Titular) and Mr Suykerbuyk (Replacement)

ITALY: Mr Palomba (Titular), Mrs Dini (Replacement) and Mr Vierin (Replacement)

SPAIN :Mr Cuatrecasas (Titular) and Mrs Estaras Ferragut (Replacement)

SWITZERLAND: Mr Guinand (Titular) and Mrs Luthi (Replacement)

RUSSIAN FEDERATION: Mr Varnavskiy (Titular), Mr Spiridonov (Replacement) and Mr Vavilov (Replacement)

***

FINLAND (AALAND) : Mr Öhman (Titular) and Mr Nousiainen (Replacement)

MOLDOVA (GAGAOUZIA) : Mr Fucedji (Titular)

PORTUGAL(AZORES, MADEIRA) : Mr Jardim (Titular) and Mr Rocha Amaral (Replacement)

UNITED KINGDOM (SCOTLAND, WALES, NORTHERN IRELAND): Mr Geddes (Titular) and Mr Middelhurst (Replacement)

***

GUEST GEORGIA (ADJARIA) :Mr Abashidze (Titular) Mr Nakashidze (Replacement)

Appendix 2
Terms of reference approved by the Congress Bureau on 7 March 2001
Composition and updating following the decisions taken by the Bureau

TERMS OF REFERENCE
The Working Group is responsible for ensuring the follow-up given to the Final Declaration of Barcelona and to organise [Conferences and Seminars of the Presidents of Regions with legislative power, notably] a Conference in the Walloon Region, within the framework of the Belgian Presidency of the European Union and to prepare a report following this Conference for presentation to the Chamber of Regions.

DURATION: 2002

WORKING LANGUAGES: French, English, German, Italian, Russian (if necessary)

NUMBER OF MEETINGS: 2 or 3 by year

COMPOSITION

AUSTRIA : Mr FREIBAUER (Titulaire/Full member) and Mr WURMITZER (Remplaçant/Alternate)

GERMANY: Mr RABE (Titulaire/Full member) and Mr KITTELMANN (Remplaçant/Alternate)

BELGIUM : Mr VAN CAUWENBERGHE (Titulaire/Full member) and Mr… (Remplaçant/Alternate)

ITALY : Mr VIERIN (Titulaire/Full member) and Ms GUIDI (Remplaçant/Alternate)

SPAIN: Mr CUATRECASAS (Titulaire/Full member) and Mr … (Remplaçant/Alternate)

SWITZERLAND: Mr PEDRAZZINI (Titulaire/Full member and M… (Remplaçant/Alternate)

RUSSIAN FEDERATION : Mr VARNAVSKY (Titulaire/Full member), Mr SPIRIDONOV (Remplaçant/Alternate) and Mr VAVILOV (Remplaçant/Alternate)

FINLAND: Mr ÖHMAN (Titulaire/Full member)

MOLDOVA: Mr CROITOR (Titulaire/Full member)

PORTUGAL (ACORES, MADERE): Mr JARDIM (Titulaire/Full member) and Mr ROCHA AMARAL (Remplaçant/Alternate)

UNITED KINGDOM (Scotland Wales, Northern Ireland): Mr MC CONNELL (Titulaire/Full member) and Mr CRAWFORD (Remplaçant/Alternate)

Substitutes :

GEORGIA: Mr VERDZADZE (Remplaçant/Alternate)

AZERBAIJAN (Autonomous Republic of Nakhichevan): Mr AGAHASANOV (Remplaçant/Alternate)

UKRAINE (Crimea) (still to be appointed)

Representatives of the institutional committee of the Chamber of Regions :
Mr OLBRYCHT, Full member
Mr DOHNAL, Full member
Mr DORIC, Substitute

Observers :
Assembly of European Regions
Council of European Municipalities and Regions
Forum of Federations, Canada
Quebec Government