14 Amendments of Jozo RADOŠ related to 2016/2148(INI)
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas cohesion policy is confronted in the current period with many political and economic challenges, deriving both from the financial crisis, leading to a decrease in public investment in many Member States, leaving the ESI funds and co-financing by the Member States as the main tool for public investment in many Member States, and from the migration crisis;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that Europe has been going through a difficult phase in both economic and political terms, so that a decentfully fledged investment policy that is oriented towards economic growth and employment, and close to citizens, is needed more than ever;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that cohesion policy 2014- 2020 has been thoroughly reworked, requiring a change in mentality and working methods at all levels of governance, but that it is often perceived as a traditional expenditure policy rather than an development and investment policy;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes thematic concentration, as it has turned out to be a good tool for creating a focused policy and the resulting greater effectiveness for the EU priorities and the EU 2020 strategy;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers that the results and benefits of cohesion policy need to be put across more effectively, not least in order to restore confidence in the European project;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Insists that cohesion policy should continue to have thematic focus, while allowing for some degree of flexibility in order to take on board the specific needs of each region, as well as the specific needs of the least developed regions in less developed Member States;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines, in particular, that consideration should be given to the circumstances of the distinctively urban or rural regions, the so-called ‘lagging regions’ and regions with permanent natural or geographical handicaps (northernmost regions with very low population density, and cross-border, insular, mountainous or outermost regions), which without cohesion policy would hardly be able to catch up with developed countries; recalls in this context that it is important to support new policy challenges, such as immigration, as well as the broadly understood digital dimension of cohesion policy (including ICT and broadband access issues, which are linked to the completion of the Digital Single Market); points to the Energy Union Strategy, as the ESI Funds have an important role to play in its delivery;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Supports the shift from a focus on infrastructure-related projects towards a focus on stimulating the knowledge economy, innovation and social inclusion, taking into account the specific features of less developed regions;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Points out that the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) is presented as a success story when it comes to fast implementation, and against this background asks the Commission to come forward with learning points forto enable the ESI Funds forto be put to use more successfully in the new programming period;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Acknowledges that simplification is an important factor in better access to funding;
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Recommends that standard procedures be established for drawing up operational programmes and for management, especially where the numerous territorial cooperation programmes are concerned;
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Highlights – especially from the point of view of reducing disparities between border regions – the European added value of ETC, which should be reflected in an increased level of appropriations for this cohesion policy objective, to be introduced as soon as practicable;
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Supports the Commission’s new approach of setting up special working groups, that is to say, project teams intended to ensure better management of ESI Funds in Member States, and calls for this approach to be developed further;
Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38 a (new)
Paragraph 38 a (new)
38a. Points out that in some Member States there are still regions whose development is lagging significantly behind and that their specific needs must be taken into account when preparing for the future programming period;