Activities of John FLACK related to 2018/2054(INI)
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on boosting growth and cohesion in EU border regions PDF (434 KB) DOC (76 KB)
Amendments (10)
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Points out that access to public services is crucial for the 150 million- strong cross-border population, and is hampered by numerous legal and administrative barriers; calls, therefore, on the Commission and the Member States to maximise their efforts to remove these barriers, especially when related to health services, transport, education, labour mobility, as well as regulation, cross- border commerce and business development;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Points to the challenges related to business activities carried out in the border regions, in particular when related to taxation, public procurement or social security systems; calls on the Member States to better align and harmonise the relevant legal provisions and achieve convergence ipromote complementarity between regulatory frameworks, in order to allow for more flexibility in the implementation of national legislation, as well as to improve the dissemination of information on cross-border issues, e.g. by creating one-stop-shops;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Expresses disappointment that the Commission’s communication did not include a specific assessment of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), including extra support which can be provided to them; believes that SMEs face particular challenges when it comes to cross-border interaction which includes, but is not limited to, those related to language, administrative capacity, cultural differences and legal divergence; meeting this challenge is particularly important as SMEs employ 67%of those in the EU’s non-financial business sectors, and create 57% of value added generation1a; _________________ 1aAnnual Report on European SMEs 2016/2017, p6
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that mutual trust, political will and a flexible approach among multi-level stakeholders are vital to overcoming the abovementioned persistent obstacles andbelieves that the value of Cohesion Policy for border regions is based on the goal of boosting jobs and growth and development in border regionsthat this action must be initiated at Union, Member State regional and local level; calls, therefore, for better coordination, dialogue and a further exchange of best practices among authorities; urges the Commission and the Member States to enhance such cooperation;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes the eGovernment Action Plan 2016-202013 as a tool to achieve an efficient and inclusive public administration, and recognises the particular value of this plan for simplification measures in the border regions; notes that the interoperability of existing e-government systems is needed at the national, regional and local administrative levels; is, however, concerned by the patchy implementation of the plan in some Member States; is also concerned about the low level of online services available for foreign entrepreneurs to start doing business in another country; notes that ongoing and future e- government projects should also seek to engage border stakeholders from neighbouring third countries to ensure the interoperability of digital systems across borders; believes that such cooperation will facilitate cross-border transactions by avoiding administrative duplication and keeping verification steps for users and businesses at a minimum; _________________ 13 Commission communication of 19 April 2016 entitled ‘EU eGovernment Action Plan 2016-2020 – Accelerating the digital transformation of government’ (COM(2016)0179).
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Underlines the positive role of European Territorial Cooperation (ETC) programmes in the development and cohesion of border regions; calls on the Commission to preserve ETC as an important objective, with a more distinct role within cohesion policy post-2020, as well as a significantly increased budget; underlines at the same time the need to simplify the programmes and reduce the administrative burdens for beneficiaries;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Reminds the Commission that in order to assess effectively the impacts of ETC programmes on growth in border regions appropriate measurement indicators must be in place; the conclusion from the 2007-2013 programming period was that there were considerable deficiencies in this area1a which makes an objective assessment of the benefits of ETC programmes impossible; _________________ 1aEuropean Territorial Cooperation, Work Package 11, Ex-post evaluation of Cohesion Policy programmes 2007-2013, focusing on the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the Cohesion Fund (CF), p. 119
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Encourages the Commission to enhance the use of existing innovative tools, which contribute to the ongoing modernisation of cross-border cooperation, such as Border Focal Point, reinforced SOLVIT, as well as the Single Digital Gateway, aimed at organising expertise and advice on cross-border regional aspects, and to further develop new ones; calls on the Commission and Member States to make public administrations digital by default insofar as possible to ensure end-to-end digital public services to citizens and businesses in border regions;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Regrets that the potential of the European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation is not being fully exploited, which could be due partly to regional and local authorities’ reservations, and partly to their unfounded fear of a transfer of competencesrecognises that reservations from regional and local authorities exist and stem from the concern that ETC programmes could lead to a transfer and loss of competences; recalls that the primary role of the European Commission in ETC programmes should be to facilitate cooperation between Member States, rather than create as an additional centralisation of authority;