26 Amendments of Krzysztof HETMAN related to 2016/2326(INI)
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)
Recital E a (new)
Ea. whereas cohesion policy has played a vital role and has shown significant responsiveness to macroeconomic and fiscal constraints, supporting the most pressing needs and strengthening certain interventions;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Underlines that growth and regional, economic and social convergence cannot be achieved without good governance, cooperation, mutual trust and the effective involvement of all partners at national, regional and local level, as is enshrined in the partnership principle (Article 5 of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR)); reiterates that the EU cohesion policy’'s shared management arrangement provides the EU with a unique tool to directly address the concerns of citizens in relation to internal and external challenges;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the first signs of the accelerated implementation of the operational programmes observed during the year 2016; urges the Commission to identify the causes of the delays in implementation to avoid similar problems at the beginning of the next programming period and strongly encourages all actors involved to continue to speed up their activities;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points out that territorial cooperation in all its forms, including macro-regional strategies, transposes the concept of political cooperation and coordination of regions and citizens across borders in the EU; underlines the merit of cohesion policy in addressing the challenges of outermost and northernmost, peripheral and sparsely populated regions;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic objectives and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as an unallocated reserve or a simplification of re-programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region as well as to create incentives for the best performing regions; calls on the Commission to use more precise indicators to measure performance;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Opposes macro-economic conditionalities and hHighlights that the link between cohesion policy and economic governance processes should be reciprocal and that a greater recognition of the territorial dimension would be beneficial for the European Semester;
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on Member States to simplify and reduce the number of national rules and guidelines and to assure that the information on EU funding is clear, concise and do not constitute unnecessary burden for the beneficiaries; calls furthermore to avoid gold-plating in the future;
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Asks the Commission to reflect on solutions based on proportionality and differentiation, especially with regard to the multiple layers of audit, which should be restricted to combating fraud and corruption, and the number of controls, to a greater harmonisation between cohesion policy and competition policy, in particular state aid rules, as well as with regard to the possibility of a single set of rules for all ESI Funds;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy; notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments; points out that the replacement of grants by loans, equity or guarantees mustloans, equity or guarantees can play a complementary role, but their use shall be carried out with caution and where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance of the Commission, European Investment Bank and Member States to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass; or by providing the incentives for the beneficiaries;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to ensure better synergies between the ESI Funds and other Union funds and programmes and to facilitate multi-fund options; warns that the EFSI should not undermine the strategic coherence and long-term perspective of cohesion policy programming should not replace or crowd out the grants and insists on the additionality of its resources;
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of alternative set of indicators to the GDP indicator, which remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such set of alternative indicators may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators based on demographic, social and employment aspects, such as Social Progress Index; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Call on the Commission to maintain the European Territorial Cooperation as one of the three equally important goals of cohesion policy; underlines, that its budget should match the great challenges that ETC has to meet, and its potential of providing the high level of European added value; calls for greater respect for Article 174 TFEU on territorial cohesion;
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Encourages the Commission to consider the possibility of using NUTS III level as classification of regions in cohesion policy for some selected priorities;
Amendment 231 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Suggests an increased use of ESI Funds in order to tackle demographic change and address its regional and local consequences, such as depopulation; notes the increasing importance of the Territorial Agenda and of successful rural-urban partnerships, as well as the exemplary role of smart cities as microcosms and catalysts for innovative solutions for regional and local challenges;
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Emphasises the role of the new territorial development tools, such as Community Led Local Development and the Integrated Territorial Investments;
Amendment 240 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Welcomes the Pact of Amsterdam and the better recognition accorded to the role of cities and urban areas in European policy-making and demands an effective implementation of the partnerships and cooperative working methods that the Pact entails through the partnerships that the Pact entails; expects the results to be incorporated in future EU policies post- 2020;
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Underlines the enhanced urban dimension of cohesion policy in the form of specific provisions for sustainable urban development and the urban innovative actions, and considers that it should be further developed in the future; encourages the Commission to strengthen the direct support to local governments under cohesion policy by enhancing financing and providing tailored instruments for territorial development;
Amendment 246 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Endorses the EU’'s commitments under the Paris climate change agreement and underlines that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible for climate change mitigation and adaptation, as well as for green economies and renewable energies, highlights the potential of European Territorial Cooperation in this regard;
Amendment 254 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. HUnderlines that in the era of euroscepticism, the increased visibility of the Cohesion Policy is vital, highlights the fact that in order to improve the visibility of ESI Funds, greater focus must be placed on participation by stakeholders and recipients; urges, furthermore, the Commission, Member States, regions and cities to communicate in a more efficient way on both the achievements of cohesion policy, particularly how it delivers the measurable change to the everyday life of EU citizens, and the lessons to be learned;
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)
Paragraph 20 a (new)
20a. Recognises that challenges such as migration and security or ongoing future political developments in the EU should not negatively affect the investments through cohesion policy or its goals and expected results, especially after the current programming period;
Amendment 266 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls for the fostering of economic, social and territorial cohesion and solidarity across the EU to be put at the top of the EU agenda, and to maintain the fight against regional disparities, poverty and social exclusion, as well as against discrimination;
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls for the fostering of economic, social and territorial cohesion and solidarity across the EU to be put at the top of the EU agenda, and to maintain the fight against poverty and social exclusion, as well as against discrimination; considers that, apart from the goals enshrined in the Treaties, cohesion policy should continue serving as a tool to attain EU political objectives and remain the Union main investment policy available to all regions;
Amendment 279 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Reiterates that it is high time to prepare the post-2020 EU cohesion policy in order to launch it effectively at the very start of the new programming period; calls therefore for timely adoption of all rules on management and control before the start of the new programming period; underlines that delayed implementation of operational programmes may affect the efficiency of cohesion policy and raises the risk of backlogs;
Amendment 282 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Underlines that the rules on management and control should be maintained and in particular no retroactive effect of new rules, including the application of Commission guidelines should be applied;
Amendment 298 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Is convinced of the need for an adequate budget for cohesion policy after 2020 which takes into account the complex internal and external challenges that the policy will have to address; calls for the share of cohesion policy in the total EU budget to be maintained in the future;
Amendment 300 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Underlines the multi-annual nature of cohesion policy and calls to maintain its 7-year programming period or to introduce a 5+5 years programming period with an obligatory mid-term revision;