Activities of Carlos COELHO related to 2023/2121(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Cohesion policy 2014-2020 – implementation and outcomes in the Member States (debate)
Amendments (9)
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the last stage of implementing and closing the MFF 2014- 2020 happened at a more challenging time for local and national administrations and coincided with the implementation of a large amount of funding from the Union in connection with a number of financial instruments, specifically the recovery and resilience plans and the MFF 2021-2027;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Bb. whereas MFF 2014- 2020 implementation rates vary considerably between Member States and between funding programmes;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Insists that due to its regional focus, strategic planning and effective implementation model , cohesion policy should remain the EU’s main instrument for reducing disparities and stimulating regional growth and continue to be a key contributor to supporting recovery from symmetric and asymmetric shocks; calls for a clear demarcaistinction between cohesion policy and other instruments in order to avoid overlaps and, competition between EU instruments; believes that there must be an increase in the overall cohesion budget and in the MFF’s share of the policy compared to the 2021-2027 programming periodand complex bureaucracy in access to EU instruments;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Believes that there must be an increase in the overall cohesion budget and in the MFF’s share of the policy compared to the 2021-2027 programming period; acknowledges the reduction in the share of the MFF 2021-2027 dedicated to cohesion, compensated only by NGEU funds;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Underscores that the cohesion policy budget should not be used forchannelled into new non-cohesion policy instruments and programmes, either within or outside the MFF; stresses that flexibility in the repurposing of cohesion funding should be a bottom-up driven process, initiated either by a Member State or by its regional or local level;
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls for disaster prevention and preparedness investments to be guaranteed either through a dedicated policy objective, thematic concentration or a specific enabling condition to ensure investments in local infrastructure and risk management in less developed urban and rural areas, including border regions and the outermost regions; believes that targeted financing should focus on climate change adaptation and mitigation by tackling the side effects of climate change locally (slow onset events as well as extreme weather events), including wildfires, desertification, floods, landslides, heatwaves, coastal erosion and other events;
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for the creation of a technical assistance programme specifically designed for smaller municipalities and cross-border and rural areas that face new challenges such as the green transition and climate change; believes that the support should be in the form 100 % EU financing for administrative capacity- building, project design and strategic planning capabilities (including planning instruments), while the allocation criteria should include the number of inhabitants and the needs and challenges of these areas;
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Identifies local and national authorities’ difficulties recruiting a qualified workforce to implement, manage and audit cohesion funds as one of the reasons for delays in implementation of those funds; calls on Member States to launch efforts to train and recruit specialised staff to optimise the implementation, management and auditing of European funds in the future in order to make those funds as effective and efficient as possible; reaffirms that the lack of a specialised workforce in local and national authorities results in bureaucratic delays that have an impact on the implementation of funded projects.
Amendment 253 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Calls on the Commission to ensure that all Member States have an effective mechanism for reporting irregularities, in line with Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/1970; recommends that irregularities are only classed as closed on the Irregularity Management System (IMS) once the missing amounts are also recovered at national level, and not only after the irregular sums are returned to the Commission; recommends that Member States ensure data in the official report of irregularities and fraud in the IMS is cross-checked with the data for the approved projects and with the data of ongoing criminal proceedings; calls on the Commission to improve coordination of the powers of OLAF and the EPPO to investigate irregularities relating to cohesion funds;