BETA

Activities of Mojca KLEVA KEKUŠ related to 2013/2104(INI)

Plenary speeches (1)

Regional policy as a part of wider State support schemes (short presentation)
2016/11/22
Dossiers: 2013/2104(INI)

Shadow reports (1)

REPORT on regional policy as a part of wider State support schemes PDF (265 KB) DOC (168 KB)
2016/11/22
Committee: REGI
Dossiers: 2013/2104(INI)
Documents: PDF(265 KB) DOC(168 KB)

Amendments (8)

Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Welcomes the new proposed rules on transparency (paragraphs 127 and 128 of the draft guidelines); encourages Member-States to comply with these rules and publish in a central website complete and accurate information about granted aid;
2013/05/28
Committee: ECON
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the fact that the primary role of State aid control is to ensure a level playing field in the internal market; fully supports the SAM overall aim of tailoring State aid rules to the need to promote economic growth, foster economic, social and territorial cohesion and stimulate job creation in the EU; notes that it is particularly relevant to promote economic growth in the most disadvantaged regions of the EU; points out that in the current times of economic and social crisis, public investment is essential as part of an overall strategy for growth and employment;
2013/05/28
Committee: ECON
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
3. Underlines the fact that the primary role of State aid control is to ensure a level playing field in the internal market; fully supports the SAM overall aim of tailoring State aid rules to the need to promote economic growth in the EU; notes that it is particularly relevant to promote economic growth in the most disadvantaged regions of the EU, keeping distortive effects within the internal market to a minimum;
2013/05/28
Committee: ECON
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission, however, to ensure that promoting economic growth through State aid will not lead to an increase in public debt; underlines the need for simplification of rules and less, but better targeted, State aid;
2013/05/28
Committee: ECON
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that regional aid can only play an effective role if it is used sparingly and proportionately, and is concentrated on the most disadvantaged regions of the EU where it is needed the most; believes, consequently, that State aid policy and cohesion policy are, to a large extent, complementary and mutually reinforcing; in this regard, urges the Commission to ensure that State aid modernization will be consistent with the proposed changes in the General Regulation on the Structural Funds and to prevent areas belonging to the same category and experiencing similar economic difficulties from being treated unequally;
2013/05/28
Committee: ECON
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. In light of the upcoming changes in the General Regulation on the Structural Funds for period 2014-2020, stresses that changes in cohesion policy legislation, especially the new categorization of regions, need to be carefully taken into account when modernizing not only RAG but also other horizontal or sector-specific guidelines for State aid; insists on establishing real synergies between all State aid instuments and cohesion policy to eliminate any disturbing discrepancies and ensure maximum consistency of the two policies;
2013/05/28
Committee: ECON
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 e (new)
5e. Expresses doubts also about the ineligibility for regional aid of "firms in difficulties within the meaning of the Community guidelines on State aid for rescuing and restructuring firms in difficulty" (paragraph 11 of the draft guidelines), noting that this is not only inconsistent with helping firms affected by the economic crisis in assisted regions but also impossible to implement, given that those guidelines explicitly contain no precise definition of firms in difficulty;
2013/05/28
Committee: ECON
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 f (new)
5f. Is convinced that it is essential that some margin of flexibility for the revision of the guidelines is kept, as mentioned in draft paragraph 177, in order to allow for any future required adjustments, since these guidelines are designed to cover a period of 7 years;
2013/05/28
Committee: ECON