8 Amendments of Michela GIUFFRIDA related to 2016/2151(DEC)
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that there is a significant difference in types of error, i.e. the distinction between negligence and large errors; notes that most of the quantifiable errors involve overstating of eligible areas and that, overall, they account for 0.7 % of the estimated aggregate error rate while there are only isolated instances of shortcomings on the part of national administrations or of infringements by them; points out furthermore that, in many instances, there has not been an investment failure, but, rather, there has been expenditure on projects, beneficiaries or costs that were ineligible for assistance;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Expresses satisfaction with the results for the ESI Funds obtained by the Commission's Task Force for Better Implementation (TFBI), which reduced bottlenecks and delays in the allocation and use of the Structural Funds for 2006- 2013
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Expresses its concern that managing authorities presented a lower level of cost claims for reimbursement in 2015 than in 2014, which led to a fall in the level of unpaid cost claims from EUR 23,2 billion in 2014 to EUR 10,8 billion in 2015, of which EUR 2,8 billion had remained unpaid since the end of 2014; points out the risk that delays in the budgetary execution for 2014-2020 period will be greater than those for the previous period, owing to the amount for reimbursement claims and unpaid invoices at the end of 2014 and 2015 for the 2014-2020 programmes still being negligible;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes with concern the delayed start-up of the 2014-2020 programming period and that by the end of 2015 fewer than 20 % of the national authorities responsible for ESI funds had been designated; urges Member States to speed up this process and the Commission to provide assistance and clarificationsby launching constant monitoring of progress made in implementing projects and urges the Commission to provide assistance and clarifications, including with reference to the role accorded financial instruments as new leverage devices in the period 2014- 2020;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Draws attention to the fact that many small-scale programmes, such as the school fruit and school milk schemes, are not user-friendly, partly because of the red tape involved, meaning less than perfect acceptance and implementation; welcomes Commissioner Hogan’s simplification initiatives in this connection;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Welcomes the simplification efforts made by the Commission and hopes that further steps forward will be taken during the revision of the CAP;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Welcomes the information measures launched by the Commission with regard to the opportunities offered by CAP projects and announcements relating thereto, so that end users can benefit from them more;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Welcomes the Court’s approach to focus on performance and considers it good practice that managing authorities define relevant result indicators measuring the contribution of the projects to the achievement of the objectives set for the operational programmes in accordance with the additionality criterion.