<s>[INST] The next text is a question of a member of the European parliament:"On 21July 1999, the Council adopted Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999, establishing the general provisions on the Structural Funds(1).  The Lisbon and Tagus Valley Region (Portugal), which met the Objective I eligibility criteria laid down for the Second Community support framework 1994/1999(2), but after assessment, ceased to be eligible from 1999(3). It should nonetheless continue to benefit, on a transitional basis, from the Funds from 1January 2000 to 31December 2005(4). In accordance with the Conclusions of the Berlin summit of 24 and 25March 1999(5), the phasing out mechanism must be applied to former Objective I regions. Over and above this, the Conclusions acknowledge that the Lisbon Region should have """"""""special provisional treatment"""""""" in the shape of a grant of € 500 million(6). In view of the obvious disparities between the Region's various economic operators and sectors, the agreement merely reflected the over-arching horizontal principles deriving from the Treaty which apply to all Community policies, namely sustainable development and equal opportunities.  These principles, like the acquis communautaire's competition rules, are undermined by the failure to pursue the agreed phasing-out policy. Economic operators in the neighbouring regions - eligible under Objective I - will enjoy enormous competitive advantages, giving rise to imbalances and distortions.  Given that the Structural Funds for the Lisbon and Tagus Valley Region are currently suspended, will the Commission give the reasons for this suspension? If it has taken place in the context of negotiations with the Portuguese Government, what are the reasons and who is responsible for failing to apply the provisions of Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999, failing to observe Commission Decision 1999/502/EEC of 1July 1999 and ignoring what was agreed at the Berlin Summit?    (1)Pursuant to Article 161 of the Treaty and under the procedure laid down in Article 251 thereof.  (2)Regulations (EC) Nos 2052/88 and 4253/88, OJ L 158, 15.7.1988 and OJ L 374, 31.12.1988.  (3)cf. Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 - OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.  (4)i.e. the provisions of Article 6 should have been applied, and likewise the provisions of Articles 7(2), second paragraph and (3), third paragraph of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999, in accordance with Commission decision 1999/502/EC - OJ L 194, 27.7.1999.  (5)And particularly paragraphs 42, 43 and 44(a) thereof.  (6)Paragraph 44(a)."
Analyze carefully the text and assign it to the most relevant policy area among those listed below. Do not explain your answer and return only a number.
Policy area numbers: 1 = Macroeconomics
2 = Civil Rights, Minority Issues and Civil Liberties
3 = Health
4 = Agriculture and Fisheries
5 = Labour, employment and pensions
6 = Education
7 = Environment
8 = Energy
9 = Immigration
10 = Transportation
12 = Law and Crime
13 = Social welfare
14 = Regional and Urban issues and Planning
15 = Banking, finance and domestic commerce issues
16 = Defence
17 = Space, science, technology, and communications issues
18 = Foreign trade
19 = International affairs and foreign aid
20 = Governance and government
21 = Public Lands, Water Management and Territorial Issues
23 = Culture and media
[/INST]. Answer = [14]. </s>
On 21July 1999, the Council adopted Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999, establishing the general provisions on the Structural Funds(1).  The Lisbon and Tagus Valley Region (Portugal), which met the Objective I eligibility criteria laid down for the Second Community support framework 1994/1999(2), but after assessment, ceased to be eligible from 1999(3). It should nonetheless continue to benefit, on a transitional basis, from the Funds from 1January 2000 to 31December 2005(4). In accordance with the Conclusions of the Berlin summit of 24 and 25March 1999(5), the phasing out mechanism must be applied to former Objective I regions. Over and above this, the Conclusions acknowledge that the Lisbon Region should have """"""""special provisional treatment"""""""" in the shape of a grant of € 500 million(6). In view of the obvious disparities between the Region's various economic operators and sectors, the agreement merely reflected the over-arching horizontal principles deriving from the Treaty which apply to all Community policies, namely sustainable development and equal opportunities.  These principles, like the acquis communautaire's competition rules, are undermined by the failure to pursue the agreed phasing-out policy. Economic operators in the neighbouring regions - eligible under Objective I - will enjoy enormous competitive advantages, giving rise to imbalances and distortions.  Given that the Structural Funds for the Lisbon and Tagus Valley Region are currently suspended, will the Commission give the reasons for this suspension? If it has taken place in the context of negotiations with the Portuguese Government, what are the reasons and who is responsible for failing to apply the provisions of Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999, failing to observe Commission Decision 1999/502/EEC of 1July 1999 and ignoring what was agreed at the Berlin Summit?    (1)Pursuant to Article 161 of the Treaty and under the procedure laid down in Article 251 thereof.  (2)Regulations (EC) Nos 2052/88 and 4253/88, OJ L 158, 15.7.1988 and OJ L 374, 31.12.1988.  (3)cf. Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999 - OJ L 161, 26.6.1999.  (4)i.e. the provisions of Article 6 should have been applied, and likewise the provisions of Articles 7(2), second paragraph and (3), third paragraph of Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999, in accordance with Commission decision 1999/502/EC - OJ L 194, 27.7.1999.  (5)And particularly paragraphs 42, 43 and 44(a) thereof.  (6)Paragraph 44(a).