INTERREG

1
Interreg III Seminar Novi Sad, SerbiaInterreg
IIIA trilateral program Hungary-Romania-Serbia
CSALAGOVITS Imre János
National Agency for Regional Development Interreg
Department 1016 Budapest, Gellérthegy u. 30-32.
Tel. [phone] E-mail Csalagovits_at_pharereg
.hu
2

• I. Hungarian experience in cross-border
  co-operation (short summary)
• II. Preparation of new Interreg IIIA cross border
  programme Serbia-Romania-Hungary
• III Implementation institutions and procedures

3
Interreg IIIA Programs (2004-2006) Borders and
external finanacing instruments

• Borders
• Internal
• - Austria
• - Slovakia
• - Slovenia
• External
• Romania (Phare)
• Ukraine (Tacis)
• Croatia (Cards)
• Serbia (Cards)

UR
SK
AU
RO
SL
CR
YU
4
Programs and models

• INTERREG III A programs
• Internal (bilateral) program
• - Austria-Hungary
• New internal-external trilateral programs
• - Slovakia-Hungary-Ukraine
• - Slovenia-Hungary-Croatia
• New external trilateral program
• - Hungary-Romania-Serbia
• Interreg IIIB program
• CADSES program
• Interreg IIIC program
• Interreg IIIC program, East zone
• Interact, Espon

UR
SK
AU
RO
SL
CR
YU
5
Phare and InterregPhare CBC Programs in Hungary
1995-2006
1995-2001 programs AUSTRIA 62
MEUR Au-Slovenia 3 MEUR Au-Slovakia 3
MEUR Romania 24 MEUR SLOVAK 6
MEUR SLOVEN 4 MEUR TOTAL 102
MEUR 2002-2003 programs AUSTRIA 20
MEUR ROMANIA 10 MEUR SLOVAK 4
MEUR SLOVEN 4 MEUR TOTAL 38 MEUR
6
Phare and InterregNational Phare Programme
2002-2003

• Twinning light transfer of experience of the
  Member States
• Technical Assistance documents (ex ante,
  financial management,etc), training, information
  campaign (seminars, publications)
• CADSES Phare Project Fund / Interreg IIIC PF
• Pilot Small Project Funds at the non-CBC (future
  external) borders (Croatia, Ukraine, Serbia)

7
Pilot Small Project Fund Serbia-Hungary

• Financed by the national Phare program for
  Hungary
• 2003 program 0.5 M EUR (be developed jointly by
  September)
• In principle, Phare CBC SPF rules are applied
• Serbian Partners will participate in the decision
  making (as members of the Evaluation Committee)
• Soft projects for people to people actions
• Serbian partners can be financed as partners
  within the projects

8
Interreg III Indicative allocation of funds
between the 3 strands (Hungary) (2004-2006)
9
Indicative allocation of Interreg funds between
Interreg IIIA programs (Hungary, 2004-2006)
10
Summary

• High expectations
• Limited funding
• Concentration 2-3 priorities, few measures
• Genuine cross-border character
• Innovative approach
• Competition between projects, transparent
  project selection
• Co-ordination with mainstream programmes and
  Phare
• Simple implementation structures

11
Preparation of the new Interreg IIIA programme

• Task force meetings 1th Békéscsaba (Hu) 2nd
  Arad (Ro), 3rd Novi Sad (Se)
• Seminars for strategic programme development
  Arad (Ro)
• First draft Programme (CIP) end of July
• Ex ante evaluation August, September
• (Pre-) Joint Monitoring Committee Meeting
  Mid-September
• Submission of draft CIP to the European
  Commission end of September
• Development of the Programming Complement
  August-Deecember

12
Preparation of the new programmes

• Joint Task Force
• lead the programming process
• composed by the reprentatives of
  national/regional/local level
• 2-4 experts/country
• Expert group (preparation of the strategic part
  of CIPs and programme complements)
• Preferably composed by experts from the concerned
  countries
• technical preparation of the documents
• organization of the workshops

13
Cross border cooperation between Hungary, Romania
and Serbia (2004-2006)

• Border between Hungary and Romania - external
  border of EU
• Border between Serbia and Hungary external
  border of EU
• Border between Serbia and Romania non EU border
• EC proposed new trilateral program
  Romania-Hungary-Serbia (2004-2006)

14
External and Internal components

• Internal components activity within the Member
  States (Hungary) will be under the framework of
  INTERREG programmes, and they will therefore
  remain in the Structural Funds framework
• External components of the program will remain
  within the framework of the respective Regulation
  (Phare, Cards), and will implement the respective
  Strategy/ Indicative/Action programmes adopted by
  the Commission following consultation of the
  relevant management committee.
• From the perspective of the stakeholders,
  however, the two components will operate as one
  single Neighbourhood Programme.

15
Neighbourhood Programmes

• The European Commission proposed for the period
  between 2004-2006 the introduction of
  Neighbourhood Programmes covering the external
  borders of the enlarged Union. These programmes
  will be prepared jointly by relevant stakeholders
  on both sides of the border.
• Between 2004-2006, Neighbourhood Programmes
  should operate within the existing legal
  framework and should seek in a pragmatic and
  dynamic way to improve current procedures and
  increase the effectiveness and visibility of
  co-operation

16
Problems and possible solutions
17
Financial allocations Hungary/Romania/Serbia CBC
programme 2004-2006

• Interreg allocation for Hungary
• Kopenhagen 13.12.2003 (financial allocations for
  Interreg)
• Interreg allocation Hungary 68.7 MEUR all
  Interreg strands
• 24 M EUR /3 years for the Se/Ro/Hu program
• min 25 national co-fianancing
• Phare CBC allocation for Romania
• 5 M EUR/year for the Ro/Hu border (?)
• ? M EUR/year for the Se/Ro border
• CARDS allocation for Serbia ?? (!)

18
Programme Implementation

• Role of different actors, responsibilities and
  tasks (2004-2006)
• Joint Monitoring Committee (JMC, MC)
• Joint Steering Committee (JSC, SC)
• Managing Authority (MA), National Authority (NA)
  / National Contact Point (NCP)
• Paying Authority (PA)
• Joint Technical Secretariat (JTS), Info Points
  (IPs)
• Implementing Agencies

19
Project development

• Projects can be identified, generated and
  developed by different organisations located in
  the eligible border area (defined by the
  programme complement / related regulations)
• Projects should have cross border impacts
• For jointly developed/managed projects priority
  should be given
• Project development and management and programme
  administration should be completely separated
• Conflict of interest should be avoided

20
National Agency for Regional Development (VÁTI
Kht Területfejlesztési Igazgatóság) Interreg
Department Csalagovits Imre János Head of
Department H - 1016 Budapest, Gellérthegy u.
30-32. Tel. [phone] E-mail
csalagovits_at_pharereg.hu