Activities of Ivan JAKOVČIĆ related to 2017/2040(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Implementation of EU macro-regional strategies (debate) HR
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on the implementation of EU macro-regional strategies PDF (356 KB) DOC (80 KB)
Amendments (34)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas a macro-region can be defined as an geographical area including territoryregions from a number of different countries or regions associated with one or more common features or challenges12; _________________ 12 Schmitt et al (2009), EU macro-regions and macro-regional strategies – A scoping study, NORDREGIO electronic working paper 2009:4.
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas macro-regional strategies (MRS) are significant, as they are able to mobilise public institutional actors and civil society towards common EU policy goals;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas MRS provide a platform for cooperation between EU Member States and among third countrineighbouring non-Member States for the purposes of addressing common challenges, joint planning and fostering cooperation between and improving the integration of different policy sectors;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas macro-regions are involved in the implementation of long- term, interconnected, useful and cross- cutting political issues;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas MRS are based on the ‘three no’s’ principle of no new funding, no new structures and no new legislation for now within the existing EU political framework;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas pre-existing cooperation mechanisms at EU level and between Member States facilitate the implementation of macro-regional strategies, particularly in the early phases;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the Commission adopts a single report on the success of the implementation of all existing EU macro- regional strategies every two years, with the next report due by the end of 2018;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. The relevance of the MRS has been underlined by the globalisation process, which has rendered individual countries interdependent and necessitates solutions to the cross-border problems involved, better coordination and joint planning;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recognises that – to a varying degree – elements on which the quality of implementation depends, such as commitment, ownership, resources and governance, remain difficult to overcome in achieving the pre-determined goals;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that MRS continue to make an invaluable and innovative contribution to cross-border, cross-sector and multi- level cooperation in Europe, the potential of which is not sufficiently taken advantage of;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is of the opinion that multi-level governance should be embedded inis the cornerstone of all macro-regional strategy from its inceptionies;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Encourages improved coordination and better partnerships between the different actors and policies at national and, regional leveland local level, as well as international organisations operating in this field, in order to facilitate and improve the implementation of the MRS;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises the importance of developing administrative capacity in the competent state authorities in order to ensure the effective implementation of the strategies;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines the fact that MRS must be flexible enough to be adjusted and respond to unforeseen events which may affect the regions involved, the Member States and the EU in general; highlights the necessity of the Commission’s coordinating role in this regard;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses the important roles played by the experiences drawn from previous successful macro-regional strategies in ensuring the effective implementation of all macro-regional strategies.
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Welcomes the results achieved since the launch of the strategy in 2009, particularly with regard to the cooperation mechanisms not only between but also within the regions and countries involved;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Highlights the positive impact the strategy has had on cooperation between the participating countries and regions;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Considers the Danube Financing Dialogue as a clear positive example of a way to overcome difficulties in financing the obstacles which projects of transnational and cross-border relevance often face;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses that it is essential to maintain a high degree of political support and increase resources and capacity of competent state authorities in order to tackle the remaining challenges and improve implementation;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13a. Stresses the importance of the strategy in the process of integration of the non-Member States;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Highlights the distinct nature of the EUSAIR on account of the number of potential and candidate participating countries, and considers that this format of cooperation can be a great opportunity for the entire region, in particular as regards the European integration process;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes with concern the persistent problems of resources, governance and ownership, which are preventing the strategy’s objectives from being fully achieved, and calls on the involved countries to bolster and provide greater support to the competent authorities in implementing the strategy, where such a need exists;
Amendment 88 #
16a. Highlights the strategy's enormous potential to stimulate development and better integration in the region's transport and energy infrastructure;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Considers the EUSALP as proof that the macro-regional concept can also be applied advantageously to more developed regions of the Member States;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that the EUSALP can be a good example of a template strategy for territorial cohesion, as it simultaneously incorporates different specific areas, productive areas, mountains and rural areas and some of the most important and developed cities in the EU;
Amendment 100 #
20. Stresses that the Alpine region is delineated by many borders and that the EUSALP can also provide the opportunity to strengthen transnational cross-border cooperation between regions and cities, to forge links and networks between people and to eliminate existing borders and barriers for workers and economic activities;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Points out that MRS bear fruitattain the planned results if they are rooted in a long-term political perspective and organised in such a way that all stakeholders are effectively represented from the outset, in particular taking account of the representation of local and regional levels of government;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Believes that strategy implementation can only be successful if based on efficient coordination and cooperation structures, including specific multi-level governance, and backed by adequate funding; highlights the need, in this respect, to seek synergies and complementarities of regional, national funding with EU funding instruments;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Proposes that the participating countries make clear commitments in terms of funding for implementation from the outset;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Stresses that greater result- orientation towards the achievement of results is required in order to justify the investment of resources, which should, for its part, be commensurate with the objectives set;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls for any questions about the MRS, such as on ownership and the necessary political incentives, as well as the stronger and higher-quality involvement of all levels of government in implementation, to be addressed in an appropriate manner;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Is of the opinion that the visibility of the results achieved and awareness about the activities of the macro-regions need to be enhanced;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 – point d a (new)
Paragraph 28 – point d a (new)
(da) the issue of the quality of the involvement of regional and local government in the implementation;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. It is necessary to consider the sustainability of the existing 'three no's' principle with regard to the quality of implementation, and to consider new solutions that would include the minimum funds and structures needed to improve the implementation and achievement of results;