6 Amendments of Marc JOULAUD related to 2016/2302(INI)
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Highlights that intervention logic is not a dividing line but a meeting point of grants and financial instruments so that Cohesion Policy can ensure better coverage of beneficiaries and investment gaps through a variety of measures; points out that intervention logic is a bottom-up approach in ESI Funds programming and that all Member States and all regions should continue freely setting the share of financial instruments in their respective operational programmes;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Stresses that the success of financial instruments depends on a number of factors and that it is not possible to draw general, universal conclusions about their efficiency based on one criteria, such as level of development; stresses that, in the most highly developed regions or those in transition, management and implementation costs could be disproportionate to the scale of the operational programmes, and that these tools could come into conflict with more attractive national or regional instruments; stresses, therefore, that the primary focus of financial instruments should be the sectors and actions they can support;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Recognises that both grants and financial instruments have their specific roles in Cohesion Policy but that they share the same focus pursued by the 11 thematic objectives, which is to achieve the five headline targets of the Europe 2020 strategy; stresses that financial instruments must be promoted when they have added value and on the basis of the sectors and actions they can support, but that financial engineering should not become an end in itself;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Highlights that financial instruments could perform better in well- developed regions and metropolitan areas, whileand that grants address regional structural issues, but that no general conclusions can be drawn about the link between the efficiency of financial instruments and level of development; notes that increasing the share of financial instruments should not influence the grant appropriations as this would hinder the balance; emphasises that in a number of public policies grants have to dominate, while financial instruments can play complementary roles;
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Recalls that existing experience in delivery of ESI Funds indicates that the funding mix of grants and financial instruments addresses country-specific realities as well as the gaps in social, economic and territorial cohesion; emphasises that the funding mix cannot result in a one-size-fits-all solution owing to a number of factors: geographic region, policy area, beneficiary type and size, administrative capacity, market conditions, the existence of competing instruments, business environment and fiscal and economic stance;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Stresses that all regions should be able to decide on the implementation of financial instruments and intervention sectors on a voluntary basis and according to local needs; opposes binding quantified targets for the use of financial instruments;