26 Amendments of Elisabeth SCHROEDTER related to 2008/2174(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2 a (new)
Citation 2 a (new)
- having regard to the Commission staff working document Regions 2020 - an assessment of future challenges for EU regions (SEC(2008)2868),
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas the French Council Presidency put forward a proposal for the definition of territorial cohesion during the informal meeting of the Council of Ministers in Marseille on 26 November 2008;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas the Gothenburg strategy for sustainable development is particularly suited to fostering the link between economic efficiency, social cohesion and ecological balance;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)
Recital C b (new)
Cb. whereas, as is noted in the Commission working document ‘Regions 2020’, the three interconnected crises of climate change, demographic change and the financial sector, combined with the risk of poverty and unemployment, represent a particular problem for economic, social and territorial cohesion and the Commission does not give adequate consideration to the results of this analysis either in its Fifth Progress Report or in its Green Paper, in particular with regard to the negative, long-term effects of climate change on European regions and the pressing requirement to reorient European structural policy in order to curb climate change;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Regrets that the Commission has not presented any analysis of the existing cohesion policy as regards its impact on geographical concentration or equalisation processes or on the negative effects of climate change and demographic change in certain regions; calls on the Commission to incorporate the findings from its working document ‘Regions 2020’ in the next interim report on the Cohesion Report in connection with the description of economic, social and territorial cohesion and, in so doing, to undertake a critical analysis of the effects of European policies, as well as of incorrect prioritisation and errors made in the deployment of the Structural Funds;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Shares the view expressed in the contributions to the public consultation that the aim of cohesion can be achieved only if the policy is concentrated on the less-favoured regions; observes, however, that the analyses in the working document ‘Regions 2020’ indicate that the parameters for less-favoured areas must be redefined;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Observes that the view expressed in its above-mentioned resolution of 21 February 2008 includes the rejection of any attempt for re-nationalisation and the commitment to a single Community policy, which should also be in a position to address common challenges like globalisation and poverty, climate and demographic change, migration, energy efficiency; the strong belief that this policy should cover all EU regions, by representing an added value for everyone; the need to set priorities in the spending of EU structural policies and actions and the endorsement of the "earmarking" exercise; as well as the need for synergies on the ground and an integrated approach between the different sectoral policies in order to achieve the optimal result for growth and development on the ground;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Renews its call on the Commission made in the abovementioned resolution of 21 February 2008 regarding a critical evaluation of earmarking; points out that earmarking can be maintained only if it is geared to the pressing challenges of climate change and reinforces the synergies with new employment opportunities in green sectors of the economy;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
3b. Strongly rejects the Commission’s conclusion that support for the low-wage sector and the unilateral focus on industrial development in convergence regions could help to reduce regional disparities in development; stresses that the disparity between winning and losing regions which is thus reinforced is not consistent with the principles of cohesion policy; considers that regions must define their development priorities themselves and link sustainable development above all with the competences existing at regional level;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Strongly wWelcomes the adoption of the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion by the European Commission, which responds to a long-standing demand of the European Parliament; fully endorses the decision to proceed with the analysis of “territorial cohesion”, which has long been at the forefront of any debate on regional policy, despite the fact that the Lisbon Treaty has not yet been ratified;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Considers that the Green Paper lacks ambition to the extent that it does not provide for a clear definition ofand objective for territorial cohesion, and does not, therefore, advance significantly the understanding of this new concept; regrets, moreover, that the Green Paper does not explain how territorial cohesion will be integrated in the existing framework of cohesion policy and be made operational for the next programming period;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Welcomes the analysis contained in the Green PaperObserves that the Green Paper contains an analysis which defines three key concepts that should be central to the development of territorial cohesion: concentration, connection and cooperation; considers that these concepts can providecontribute to the solution to some basic obstacles that hinder the harmonious development of the Unionbalanced and sustainable development desired by the Union in Article 2 of the Treaty, like the negative effects associated with the concentration of economic activity, the inequalities in terms of access to markets and services that result from distance, and the divisions that are imposed by boundaries between Member States but also regions; points out that the potential for the independent development of regions as a contribution towards cohesion is not be highlighted in the Green Paper;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. ARegreets with the approach of not including any references tothat no basic statement was included on the possible budgetary and financial implications of territorial cohesion in the Green Paper and the public debate; consi, since, in orders that such an analysis would be premature until the concept itself is clearly defined and understood by all stakeholders; suggests that these considerations should be made in the framework of the next financial perspectiveso guarantee territorial cohesion in the Union and to give each region a chance of equal development, it is necessary, on the one hand, for all the Member States to be willing to contribute financially and, on the other, to hold a discussion on how the European Structural Funds should be used in an effective and sustainable manner; suggests that the Commission includes this in its White Paper;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Endorses the position of the Green Paper that territorial cohesion is about ensuring the harmoniousbalanced and sustainable development of places with different characteristics and specificities, and about making sure that their citizens are able to make the most of inherent features of different territorie and the polycentric development of the Union as a whole, and about making sure that their citizens are able to develop the potentials of different territories on a sustainable basis in accordance with their needs; places emphasis on the fact that territorial cohesion is a horizontal concept that underpins the development of the Union as a whole by turning diversity into an asset of all its regions; strongly believes that territorial cohesion should prevent the prospect of an asymmetric Union;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Considers that territorial cohesion can be defined in terms of three dimensions: - equalisation of territorial imbalances through structural assistance and development of endogenous regional potential, - horizontal and vertical integration of specialist policies with relevance to regional planning, - partnership between public, private and civil-society actors in their regional planning cooperation;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)
Paragraph 11 b (new)
11b. Notes the proposal for a definition put forward by the French Council Presidency; reaffirms its objective that citizens must be offered equal opportunities for development and quality of life and undertakings must be offered fair prospects for development based on their specific geographic competences;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Believes that territorial cohesion is a distinct concept that should provide tangible added value tofacilitate the sustainable development of EU territories, where the economic and, social cohesion; stresses that the three component pand environmental goals are the pillarts of cohesion (economic, social anda single integrated concept, and that therritorial) should be complementary and mutually reinforcing, albeit maintaining theire should therefore be no hierarchy nor “trade off” between these objectives; stresses that, in the light of the debate own separate mission in a single integrthe future of cohesion policy, territorial cohesion should also take account of climated concept; considers, therefore, that there should be no hierarchy between these objectivhange objectives and therefore stimulate carbon free and resource efficient development patterns in EU territories;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Emphasizes that one of the main objectives of territorial cohesion is to ensure that progress and growth generated in one specific territory should provide benefits for the whole region and across the EU territory; considers, in this respect, that excellence centres and clusters of research and innovation are vital to economic success, scientific discovery, technological innovation and jobs and that more interaction and knowledge transfer should be stimulated between those centres and their surroundingcitizens and local economic actors have equal access to services of general interest and equal prospects for development, irrespective of the area in which they are resident (Article 16 of the Treaty); calls for the environment for the performance of those functions to be adapted to local needs and local actors and for their adaptability to be improved; calls on the Commission to examine whether unilateral support for so-called clusters or broad-based support for small and medium-sized enterprises is of fundamental importance for the economic success of regions;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Emphasises the single market's vital contribution toat liberalisation of the single market can also have negative side- effects on economic, social and territorial cohesion; stresses the importance of public services in relation to sustainable economic and social development as well as the need for socially and regionally equitable access to services of general interest; takes the view that in light of the subsidiarity principle and of EU competition law, responsibility for defining, organising, financing and monitoring services of general interest should rest with the national, regional and local authorities; considers however that a reflection on the fairan appropriate standard which guarantees equal access for citizens to services should be included in the debate on the territorial cohesion;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Notes that the Green Paper acknowledges the particular development challenges of regions with specific geographical features, such as mountainous regions, island regions and sparsely populated regions; also notes that border regions face specific policy challenges in terms of accessibility, quality and efficiency; rejects the view that territorial cohesion should be a policy exclusively dedicated to address; considers that arbitrarily selected geographical factors without any socioeconomic link should not be used in cohesion policy and cannot ing the problems of those regions; considers, however, that special consideration should be given to the development of those regions in order to offset their handicaps and enable them to effectively contribute to the harmonious development of the Union as a wholmselves constitute a suitable criterion for the eligibility of regions for assistance;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Stresses the need to elaborate, in the context of territorial cohesion, additional qualitative indicators with the purpose of better designing and implementing the corresponding policies on the ground, taking into account the different territorial specificities and safeguarding natural resources; underlines, however, that the GDP remains the only eligibility criterion for receiving financial assistance from the Structural Fundcentral criterion for defining assisted areas; reiterates its call to examine which additional criteria should be used to describe the situation of the regions;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Calls on the Commission to examine the extent to which the problem of the erosion of the internal development differentials of NUTS II areas can be countered in future by defining assisted areas at NUTS III level;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for the introduction of a territorial component in the Strategic Environmental Assessment in order to take due account of the regional planning effects of programmes, plans and projects;
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Reiterates its long-standing request for the development of a comprehensive EU strategy for regions with specific geographical features, which will enable them to better address problems and challenges they are facing; believes that an EU strategy should also be concerned on how to adapt Community policies to the specific needs and assets of these territorieEmphasises that regional planning cooperation between areas which share a common natural habitat, such as coastal regions, riparian regions and mountainous regions, is a targeted and promising territorial cohesion strategy which must be developed and encouraged, as it gives the necessary economic and ecological incentives for the individual regions;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Stresses that in addition to regional planning cooperation the implementation of Natura 2000, including the networking of natural habitats, is the main European activity which influences the Member States’ spatial planning; calls on the Member States above all to enshrine the European principles of polycentric development and urban-rural partnership in their regional planning;
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Considers that taking an integrated approach will have a greater chance of success if the regional and local authorities and the partners under Article 11 of the General Regulation on the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund, as well as stakeholders who can provide an overall view and understanding of the needs and specificities of a given territory, are involved from the beginning in the designing and, implementation of the development strategies of each territory, monitoring, evaluation and project selection of the development strategies and Operational Programmes of each territory; insists that the integrated approach must be a mandatory requirement for the receipt of assistance;