12 Amendments of Rosa D'AMATO related to 2016/2304(INI)
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls on the Commission, in close cooperation with the managing authorities, to monitor regularly that all legal provisions as regards information and communication are being implemented thoroughly in order to ensure transparency and the widespread dissemination of information about the achievements of the Funds; in order to improve the communication of the results and make it more effective, provision should also be made for the creation of a specific item in the budget, but without this involving any increase in the overall budget;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls on the Commission to evaluate what has not worked in the past in order to correct in a constructive manner the errors that have been committed and to improve the way in which Cohesion Policy functions; in 2015, 30% of Europeans2 a declared that the impact of projects co-financed by the EU had been negative while another 30% claimed that the funds had been allocated to the wrong projects; __________________ 2 a Flash Eurobarometer 423 - http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/source s/docoffic/official/reports/eurobarometer/ 423/citizen_awareness_summary_en.pdf
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes, on the other hand, that overall public awareness and perceptions about the effectiveness of the EU’s regional policy have been declining over the years; refers to the Eurobarometer 423 of September 2015 in which just over a third (34%) of Europeans affirm they have heard about EU co-financed projects improving the quality of life in the area where they leave; stresses, moreover, that, asked to identify specific domains that should be targeted for investment, an overwhelming majority of respondents (91%) mentioned education, health and social infrastructure as an important domain and that nearly nine in ten (86%) of those interviewed highlighted the importance of environmental policy;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to improve the visibility of the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) by communicating the European added value of the projects, particularly in terms of job creation and social integration, including through information events for all citizens and targeted training sessions with and for European project stakeholders;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to adopt instruments able to assess not only the quantity but also the quality of the jobs created, as precarious types of employment without adequate safeguards or contracts that involve the exploitation of workers contribute to a negative perception of the cohesion policies;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Member States to devote an appropriate share of ESF resources to strengthening the institutional capacity of public authorities and stakeholders in Member States where neededthere have been most cases of irregularities and the municipalities do not participate in calls for tenders; suggests finding suitable forms of cooperation at all levels so as to ensure that competent officials are committed without conflicts of interest to achieving an overall improvement in administrative capacity; calls on the Commission to assess the improvements made by the Member States in this respect.
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Invites the European Commission and the Council to thoroughly analyse the underlying causes of the Euro-scepticism and to adequately address the underlying issues that may foster it, thus not merely indulging in an aprioristic and uncritical defence of the status quo;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Calls on the European Commission and the Council to consider if, in both current framework and in the post-2020 reform of Cohesion Policy, measures aimed at strengthening the link with the European semester and at implementing structural reforms via programmes financed by ESI Funds, could provoke an increase of a negative perception of the EU policies and could further undermine trust in the European project among the European citizens and the local and regional authorities;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls also the long-term strategic nature of cohesion policy investments, meaning that sometimes results are not seen immediately, which is detrimental to the visibility of its instruments, especially in comparison with other Union tools such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI); calls for a more detailed evaluation of the long-term impact of cohesion policy in the Member States' labour markets, with a particular focus on the type-and not only on the number-of jobs created by ESI Funds;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
Paragraph 13 a (new)
13 a. Invites National, Regional and Local Authorities to provide DG REGIO, DG EMPL, DG AGRI, DG MARE with timely and detailed information on the financial data and the achievements of the relevant operational programmes, also in order to enhance the ESI Funds Open Data Platform and increase the transparency, accountability and comparability of the implementation of the programmes in the Member States;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Considers it necessary, in order to make cohesion policy genuinely more credible, to highlight sufficiently both 'good' and 'bad' practices, through databases that go beyond providing a scant description of the project and the expenditure incurred, thus enabling citizens to check effectively both the added value and value of most of the projects implemented and, in certain cases, their lack of usefulness in relation to a given local area;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the Commission to increase the attractiveness of EU cohesion policy funding through further simplification and flexibility measures, as well as through reducing the number of regulations and through limiting thus both active and passive gold-plating;