BETA

17 Amendments of Marco ZULLO related to 2016/2148(INI)

Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
1. Takes note of the Commission communication regarding negotiations of partnership agreements (PAs) and operational programmes (OPs) as required by Article 16(3) of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR) and considers it disappointing that the Commission, instead of producing a report, as was originally intended, has merely submitted a communication;
2016/09/06
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
2. Is of the opinion that the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds) are crucial investment tools, including for rural areas, and that the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) is one of the main financing vehicles for boosting rural development in many Member States;
2016/09/06
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that the ESI Funds should be used to promote high-quality jobs, totally free of abuse and exploitation, and to support sustainable development, focusing in particular on the circular economy and renewable energy sources in a low-carbon context serving also to reduce pollutant emissions;
2016/09/06
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
D. whereas the negotiations for PAs and Operational Programmes (OPs) for the period 2014-2020 have been a modernised, strongly adjusted and intensive exercise with a new framework for performance- based budgeting, ex-ante conditionalities and thematic concentration, resulting inadvertently, also because of clear shortcomings in the administrative capacity of several regions and Member States, in serious delays in the actual commencement of cohesion policy implementation;
2016/09/19
Committee: REGI
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
F. whereas cohesion policy is confronted in the current period with many challenges, deriving from the financial crisis, austerity policies and the management of the migration issue, leading to a decrease in public investment in many Member States, leaving the ESI funds and co-financing by the Member States as the main tool for public investment in many Member States, and from the migration crisis;
2016/09/19
Committee: REGI
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3α. Points to the importance of the EAFRD for micro, small, and medium- sized enterprises;
2016/09/06
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that Europe has been going through a difficult phase in both economic and political terms, so that a decent investment policy that is close to citizens and more commensurate with the real needs and vocations of local areas is needed now more than ever;
2016/09/19
Committee: REGI
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
3. Observes that the key communication on cohesion policy projects should focus on European added value and the visibility of success stories; insists that communication on the subject of the ESI Funds should be modernised and intensified; considers it necessary, in order to make cohesion policy genuinely more credible again, 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;
2016/09/19
Committee: REGI
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Believes that it is necessary, when making use of ESIFs, to separate co- financing from the Stability and Growth Pact;
2016/09/06
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that the more flexible structure of the EAFRD was not fully taken advantage of by some Members States and regions which perceived a risk of increased complexity and control requirements; expresses disquiet at the results for less developed regions and regions in transition, which are the worst recorded to date;
2016/09/06
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
8. Supports the shift from a focus on major infrastructure-related projects towards a focus on stimulating the knowledge economy, innovation and social inclusion;
2016/09/19
Committee: REGI
Amendment 94 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Urges the Commission to work towards continuous monitoring of the use of ESIFs in order to make them effective and transparent;
2016/09/06
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 110 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the Commission, in addition, to seek to harmonise definitions and rules in order to provide greater coherence among the funds and instruments.
2016/09/06
Committee: AGRI
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
15. FavoursConsiders that the establishment of a balanced link between cohesion policy and the European Semester, as both wespecially where it consists of the option fork towards achieving the same aims under the Europe 2020 She Commission – provided for in Article 23 of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR) – to propose amendments to the Partnership Agreement of a Member State to support the implementation of relevant Council Recommendations, runs totally counter to the economic, social and territorial cohesion aims laid down in the treategyies;
2016/09/19
Committee: REGI
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
19. Supports a further balanced increase in financial instruments; aAsks the Commission, therefore, to come forward with incentives forto ensure that managing authorities to achieve thisare better informed on the opportunities for using financial instruments and their scope;
2016/09/19
Committee: REGI
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Notes, however, the lack of evidence on the outcomes and results achieved by financial instruments and the loose link between those financial instruments and the overarching objectives and priorities of the EU;
2016/09/19
Committee: REGI
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
37. Underlines that faster take-up of the available funds is needed in future; takes the viewvital in future, with a more balanced progression of expenditure during the programming cycle, also in order to avoid frequently turning to 'consistent' projects, which are often funded with the sole aim of avoiding automatic decommitment; hopes that after adoption of the future regulation, implementation of the OPs will be able to start more quickly, as Member States will already have experience of a performance- oriented policy after the efforts made for cohesion policy 2014- 2020; regrets, however, in this regard, the delays on the part of several Member States in appointing managing authorities for the OPs;
2016/09/19
Committee: REGI