Activities of Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA related to 2023/2121(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Cohesion policy 2014-2020 – implementation and outcomes in the Member States (debate)
Amendments (10)
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. Whereas the efficient management of the cohesion funds is crucial to achieving regional development objectives and meeting local needs, and that delays, particularly in some outermost regions, have been observed in the implementation of the 2014-2020 funds, requiring further attention on the efficiency of their management; whereas some regions have not spent nearly 50% of their budget ;
Amendment 84 #
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 demarcation between cohesion policy and other instruments in order to avoid overlaps and competition between EU instruments; it is therefore necessary to enhance cooperation between the various EU support and funding programmes by bolstering the possibility of financing common projects, fostering synergies, sharing management platforms and centralising information and management, with cohesion policy always forming the backbone and primary focus of such management, given its history and the accomplishments of successive programmes; 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;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Cohesion policy is one of the hallmarks of the European Union by which the European project is recognised in each and every one of the Member States, their regions and municipalities. Many transformative projects, SMEs, entrepreneurs and citizens have been supported by and found an opportunity in the Structural and Investment Funds and have understood them as a tool to increase equal opportunities between territories and to enable citizens across the Union to develop their professional and vital projects freely; we must put the EU's cohesion policy to good use and not allow it to become the commonplace to turn to when the European Commission needs funding for new programmes or projects, however urgent they may be;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Over the past few years, the European Union has adopted a succession of new funding programmes and funds intended to provide a rapid and urgent response to the successive crises that we have suffered: pandemic, invasion of Ukraine, inflation and rising energy prices, natural disasters... All of them demonstrated the European Union’s rapid and efficient reaction capacity, but in turn have led to a collapse of state and regional public administrations as they are unable to absorb and manage so many new funds. This has led to lower implementation levels and unnecessary competition between different EU programmes; a detailed evaluation of the various European Union programmes and funds is necessary in order to simplify them as much as possible and make things easier for potential beneficiaries and managers, eliminating unnecessary duplication which only results in more bureaucracy, administrative burdens and slow implementation; successful EU programmes such as the Structural and Investment Funds should serve as a model and ought to be able to be improved, incorporating some of the initiatives that so many new programmes or funds aim to cover. The solution to all problems arising in the Union cannot always lie in the creation of a new programme but rather in the improvement and efficiency of existing ones;
Amendment 153 #
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, outermost regions and island territories; 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, floods, landslides, heatwaves, coastal erosion and other events;
Amendment 161 #
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, as well as outermost regions, overseas territories and island regions that face new challenges such as the green transition and climate change; recalls that the outermost regions and island territories are at high risk of major natural disasters, and are often impacted by high seismic or volcanic intensity, cyclones, forest fires, storms, floods, droughts, among others; 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 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls for initial allocations and co- financing rates to be assessed on the basis of NUTS 3 (nomenclature of territorial units for statistics) in order for funding to be directed to where it is most needed and to avoid pockets of underdevelopment from arising ; underlines that such a shift should take into account possible negative effects on EU financing for larger urban areas; stresses that this is necessary in order not to stall the development trajectory of metropolitan areas that were previously supported more intensively by cohesion policy; calls on the Commission to guarantee high co-financing rates for the outermost regions, namely at least 85%, and, in specific cases, 100% financing; recalls that, as recognised by the Treaties, these territories face particular constraints and an economic and social situation aggravated by their remoteness, insularity, small size, difficult topography and climate, or their economic dependence on a few products;
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls for the creation of local cohesion boards in the managing authorities and monitoring committees, which should have decision-making powers, including on co-programming and co-reprogramming with local authorities, but also be able to assess, objectively and on an ongoing basis, the effectiveness of fund management by the managing authorities, and thus contribute to the efficient implementation of cohesion policy at local level; reiterates that these boards should include representatives of urban and rural administrations, including mayors;
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Calls on the Commission to take the necessary measures to address the shortcomings identified in the management of the cohesion funds by the managing authorities, while, at the same time, simplifying the use of technical assistance funds, in order to improve the administrative and management capacities of the competent entities;
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. A rigorous evaluation of the management of the Structural and Investment Funds in each Member State and in each of the beneficiary regions and municipalities is essential; the level of implementation of the funds allocated to each of them, as well as the transformative nature and the impact on the economy and employment in the area, must be assessed to verify that the funds are being properly managed and invested as intended; the non-implementation of funds by some governments results in increasing inequalities between territories and people; the institutions have to be demanding in their evaluations, including in order to avoid repeating mistakes in successive programmes, and always aim for the ultimate goal of full implementation and the greatest impact on economic growth and employment generation;