Secondly, regional aid must have an incentive effect, i.e. it must provide a real incentive to undertake investments which would not otherwise be made in the assisted areas. In that sense, the Guidelines mention that ‘aid schemes must lay down that an application for aid must be submitted before work is started on the projects’ (39).

5. Notes also that, according to the European Court of Auditors’ report on the implementation of the 2008 budget, the estimated error rate is very largely attributable to eligibility errors; stresses that, to reduce the risk of certain errors in relation to eligibility issues and breaches of public procurement rules, the Commission should not only target its own auditing more specifically in these areas, but should also introduce preventive guidance for Member States and their regional and local authorities on how to apply the rules correctly;

10. Stresses its determination to be fully involved in the preparation and assessment of the BEPGs and the EES, but points to the extremely tight calendar between the publication of the Commission proposals and their adoption by the Council, which precludes any substantive contribution from Parliament; underlines that the effectiveness of the Employment Guidelines depends on the involvement of and implementation by national, regional and local government, as well as civil society and the social partners, and on adequate scrutiny by p ...[+++]arliaments within the Member States;

In fact, innovative measures under Article 6 of the European Social Fund can play a vital role in increasing employment and enhancing regional and social cohesion, the sine qua non to our strategic objectives, and we must not just make use of them, we must also take action to make up for lost time and lost resources, because the guidelines for innovative measures were only finally adopted a full year after the adoption of the structural fund regulations, which made delays in implementation unavoidable.

4. That the proposed work plan of the Committee be compressed, that the Minister of Human Resources Development be invited to appear before the Committee by November 7, 1997, and that the revised work plan take into account a panel on student assistance, the Office of the Auditor General and the Minister of Labour; That the following individuals be invited to appear before the Committee to present briefings as part of the work plan: From Treasury Board Secretariat: David Miller Assistant Secretary; From Human Resources Development: Mel Cappe/Ian Green Deputy Minister/Associate Deputy Minister Norine Smith Executive ...[+++] Director Employment Insurance Nicole Senecal Assistant Deputy Minister Labour David Good Assistant Deputy Minister Human Resources Investment Fund Serge Rainville Assistant Deputy Minister Income Security Programs Jim Lahey Assistant Deputy Minister Strategic Policy Martha Nixon Associate Executive Head Officials from Strategic Policy; and Senior Public Policy Researchers; Representatives from other departments with significant responsibilities in the area of disability; panel with representatives from disability organizations; panel with representatives from organizations dealing with children, youth and seniors; and That any Order of Reference from the House, or if the Standing Committee agrees to a substantive study under Standing Order 108(2), would take precedence over the work plan.

Appearing from the Treasury Board Secretariat was Mr. Mike Joyce, Assistant Secretary, Expenditure Management and Strategies Sector. He was accompanied by: Ms. Susan Cartwright, Assistant Secretary, Government Operations Sector; Ms. Daphne Meredith, Assistant Secretary, Economic Sector; Mr. Bill Austin, Assistant Secretary, Social and Cultural Sector; and Ms. Laura Danagher, Executive Director, Expenditure Operations and Estimates Directorate.