47 Amendments of Jan OLBRYCHT related to 2011/2035(INI)
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)
Citation 17 a (new)
- having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Fifth Cohesion Report’, adopted on 1 April 2011,
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the cohesion and structural policies have proved flexible in crisis situations and have made a defining contribution to various national recovery and training programmes, and whereas it is important to maintain this flexibility,
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas European structural policy contributes greatly to overcoming the economic and financial crisis, as it tends to be oriented towards innovation and removing disparities, strongly encouraging the European regions to upgrade infrastructure, increase regional innovation potential and boost sustainable ecological development,
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas gearing the structural funds to the Lisbon Strategy objectives has proved effective, as is evident from the impressive commitment rates for the Convergence and the Regional Competitiveness and Employment objectives, although it is regrettable that onlynd whereas 20% of projects under the heading of Territorial Cooperation accord with the Lisbon aims,
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas the existing system of cohesion and structural policy objectives (Convergence, Regional Competitiveness and Employment, and European Territorial Cooperation), combined with a multi-level governance approach and security to plan on the basis of reliable funding and an agreed time frame (seven years), has basicoverally proved its worth, but whereas there have been considerable delays in programme planning as a result of protracted financial and legislative negotiations and substantial changes in the rules applying to cohesion policy,
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas a comprehensive European cohesion policy continues to be essential, given the significant imbalances between regional economies and in social terms and the geographical disadvantages of certain regions (particularly the outermost regions), as well as specific structural problems and geographical disadvantathe need to adapt to new challenges, and it is also a requirement under the Lisbon Treaty,
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas a comprehensive and well- funded European cohesion policy continues to be essential, given the significant imbalances between regional economies and in social terms, as well as specific structural problems and geographical disadvantages, and it is also a requirement under the Lisbon Treaty,
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recognises, too, that European funding adds value where projects supported at regional level contribute to the achievement of pan-European objectives in the fields of European integration, economic growth, research, environmental protection, culture, resource management, demographic change, energy supply sustainability, social cohesion or cross- border development and this would not have been realised without the European stimulus;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Sees the achievement of European objectives in accordance with the principle of multi-level governance as one of the major advantages of cohesion policy and thus as a form of added value in itself; calls for this partnership principle to be further strengthenedConsiders thorough structures and responsibilities in the multi-level governance as the realisation of the principle of subsidiarity; calls for this partnership principle and the sense of ownership of the actors involved to be further strengthened by introducing detailed binding provisions in a Territorial Pact to be decided in each Member State; in order to boost up i.a. more result oriented planning and implementation;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Emphasises that, despite the trend towards a narrowing of inter-regional disparities, major imbalances still exist – and in some Member States are actually growing – so cohesion policy must continue to concentrate on evening out differences between regions’ levels of developmentreducing disparities and implementing harmonious development for all Europe’s regions;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that the Union will be able to hold its own in the face of global competition only if its cohesion policy can tap the development potential of all the regions and cities in response to the challenges of the EU 2020 strategy;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Sees macroregional strategies as affording a major opportunity to harness forms of trans-regional potential and adopt a joint approach to challenges stemming from the natural environment, e.g. in relation to environmental protection; economic, social and territorial cohesion; highlights the need to link territorial cooperation programmes more effectively with territorial strategies that are based on a shared commitment from regional stakeholders; considers that better coordination of existing support mechanisms can create scope for more targeted use of the EU Structural Funds;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Sees macroregional strategies as affording a major opportunity to harness forms of trans-regional potential and adopt a joint approach to shared challenges stemming from the natural environment, e.g. in relation touch as environmental protection; considers that better coordination of existing support mechanisms can create scope for more targeted use of the EU structural funds;
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Sees macroregional strategies as affording a major opportunity to harness forms of trans-regsupranational potential and adopt a joint approach to challenges stemming from the natural environment, e.g. in relation to environmental protection; considers that better coordination of existing support mechanisms can create scope for more targeted use of the EU Structural Funds;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Doubts whether specific operational programmes for functional geographical entities such as metropolitan regions or sea or river basins will yield additional benefits; is particularly aware, in relation to such programmes, of the absence of political bodies (including democratically elected bodies) with a sufficiently wide- ranging remit to implement them; calls instead for closer coordination of macroregional or natural-environment strategies at inter-governmental levels; calls for cross-border groupings to be involved in devising the operational programmes for cross-border programmes, on the basis of the EGTC Regulation;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Doubts whether specific operational programmes for functional geographical entities such as metropolitan regions or sea or river basins will yield additional benefits; is particularly aware, in relation to such programmes, of the absence of political bodies (including democratically elected bodies) with a sufficiently wide- ranging remit to implement them; calls instead for closer coordination of macroregional or natural- environment strategies at inter- governmental levels;
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the key role of towns and citiecities and regions in achieving the economic, environmental and social EU 2020 objectives; calls for support for ideas and projects which can serve as models, on the basis of integrated place-based development plans, and for the upgrading of urban-rural links; underlines that the greatest socioeconomic differences often exist within cities and that cities with deprived areas and pockets of poverty can also be found in wealthy regions;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Rejects the use of obligatory quotas in particular for national allocations under ESF/ERDF programmes, for local and urban development, for the countryside or otherwise according to categorisation on the basis of population density or territorial function; also regards as questionable could ensure a bigger critical mass of interventions; the requirement to specify already at operational programme level which urban and other areas are to be eligible for support, and calls is an option that should be prioritised when this method ensures added value and concentration of aid intensity this needs to be negotiated on the basis of the principles of multi-level- governance; it is up for the Member States and regions to be allowed to organise competitive selection procedures in this respect as well;
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Emphasises that support from the Cohesion Fund and the Structural Funds must be more strongly oriented towards the educational and socio-political challenges of the EU 2020 strategy while keeping with the Treaty’s Cohesion as overarching EU objective; takes the view, however, that across-the-board ‘Europeanisation’ of the relevant policy areas would be a doomed endeavour purely on financial grounds; calls, therefore, for the further place based local development of approaches that could serve as models, while retaining existing national and regional competences;
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Sees scope under the Structural Funds for specifically supporting investment in energy infrastructure, although such support must be available onespecially in regions where political or geographical constraints significantly hamper the ability of the market to meet energy-supply needs; calls, too, for support from the Structural Funds to be made contingent in all cases on the adoption of a commercial approach and of compliance with the principle of multi- level governance;
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Also considers that cohesion policy has a responsibility to do what is needed to fill gaps and remove bottlenecks in a core TEN network of main routes of European significance, particularly in the border regions which have until now been badly neglected in this regard;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Emphasises that the trans-European transport networks play a decisive role in European regional cohesion and that development of TEN infrastructure, Motorways of the Sea and designated E- roads must therefore be stepped up and access to them improved, especially in border regions; suggests that ‘infrastructure’ be accorded more importance as a category of project eligible for support in connec and outermost regions,; suggests that certain crossborder ‘infrastructure’ shall be considered as priority projects eligible to funds of the objective 1, 2 and 3 calls for a obligatory right to make the first proposal of the regional level for this type of action and equal participation withof the third objective of European Territorial Cooperation; border regions and local authorities in the planning;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. supports economic development and employment in SMEs and micro- enterprises; therefore requests that the fundamentals of the Small Business Act for Europe (SBAE), i.e. "Think Small First" and "Only once ", are considered as one of the bases of cohesion policy and considers that these principles should be applied by Member States and regions in the definition of their operational programs;
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Takes the view that GDP must be retained as the key criterion in the definition of areas eligible for maximum support (those with GDP/PE below 75% of the EU average) and, where appropriate, cohesion countries (GDP/PE below 90% of the EU average); points out that the competent national authorities must continue to have scope for thehave the flexibility to use of additional indicators at the relevant decision-making levels to be agreed in the national strategic reference frameworks and their use for territorial targeting should be encouraged by the Regulations where this ensures bigger added value and concentration for EU funds;
Amendment 270 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls for a strengthening of Objective 2 (Regional Competitiveness and Employment), which is based on a cross- cutting approach, to be upgraded; stresses that the proven system of innovation clusters and competition for funding needs to be developed further; stresses for Objective 2 regions that the proven system of ensuring that more developed regions are able to remove regional structural weaknesses; reduce territorial disparities; contribute to common European objectives; and to meet future challenges, when using structures that can respond flexible to changing circumstance, including, inter alia, innovation clusters and competition for funding, must be retained and developed further; calls for additional instruments for areas highly affected by structural change, which can contribute to the socio-economic and infrastructural improvement;
Amendment 277 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 293 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Takes the unequivocal view that efforts under Objective 3 (European Territorial Cooperation) need to be stepped up at all EU internal borders and at all three levels of such cooperation (cross-border, inter- regional and trans-national) and calls for the relevant share of the structural funds to be increased to 7%; calls for the allocation of funding for each territorial cooperation programme to be based on harmonised criteria in order to provide a strategic and integrated response to the needs and specificities of each geographical territory and area concerned; stresses the importance of the border regions in terms of achievement of the EU 2020 objectives; considers that there is a need for closer linkage with the TEN networkto increase the coordination of the TEN networks and their subsidies – in line with European priorities – and with cross-border infrastructure, and calls for a corresponding increase in funding for all border regions;
Amendment 302 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Considers that EGTCs represent a unique, highly valuable territorial governance instrument which responds to the needs for structured cooperation, and must be promoted as a tool to set up systems of cross-border governance, ensuring the ownership of the different policies at regional and local level;
Amendment 313 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Draws attention to the synergies achievable through integrated approaches, notably linking the ESF and the ERDF, and calls for the option of cross-financing between these funds – specifically with a view to integrated development planning – to be facilitated; calls, furthermore, for better synergies between the EDF and the ERDF;
Amendment 316 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Draws attention to the synergies achievable through integrated local and regional development approaches, notably linking the ESF and the ERDF, and calls for the option of cross-financing between these funds – specifically with a view to integrated development planning – to be facilitated;
Amendment 320 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Calls for the sake of increasing synergies for a greater integration of sectoral policies (transport, energy, research, environment, education) in the cohesion and structural policy creating more effectiveness and better coordination between the Structural Funds, the CIP and the Framework Programmes for Research and Development, suggests that multi-fund programming could contribute to work in a more integrated manner and would increase the effectiveness between these different funds; considers the national / regional development partnerships as an appropriate instrument to bring together the various policies; in this respect underlines the need to set clear objectives and to assess whether the goals were achieved in the Member States;
Amendment 321 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 c (new)
Paragraph 27 c (new)
27c. Proposes that research and development policies be territorialised; therefore stresses the importance of adapting the cohesion policy and research and innovation policies to the specific needs of the territories; since a stronger involvement of regional and local authorities in the design and execution of the regional development funds and research and innovation programmes becomes crucial noticing the impossibility of applying the same strategy for development to all the regions;
Amendment 343 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls, in the interests of efficiency, for the elimination or merger of funds relevant to both regional development and cohesion; recommends that the European Globalisation Fund be abandoned as a stand-alone instrument and that appropriate provision for its functions be included in the Social FundAdjustment Fund be streamlined and integrated with the Structural Funds ensuring that this does not mean a decrease in the overall size of the Cohesion heading; calls for consideration of whether a merger of the Cohesion Fund and the Regional Development Fund would be compatible with the European Treaties; points out that, as a rule, monies from the Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund are spent on the same types of project;
Amendment 347 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30a. Calls for the revision of the Regulation for cross border cooperation at the outside borders and the actual ENPI, integrating these funds into the Objective 3 for territorial cooperation;
Amendment 360 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Calls for the mandatory involvement of federal Länder and regionsregional and local authorities, in accordance with constitutional and institutional set up of Member States, in drawing up development partnerships and operational programmes; considers it essential to make appropriate provision for this in the regulations governing the Structural Funds;
Amendment 379 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls, in the event that certain binding priorities are set for all Member States, for these to cover innovation, infrastructure and resource management and to be tailored in each case to regions'’ specific needs; stressNotes that SMEs are the main source of jobs in the EU and a breeding ground for business ideas; stresses that support to SMEs must be continued and strengthened in light of the key role they can play in the implementation of the EU 2020 Strategy stresses that in terms of the flagship innovation Union a broad concept of "innovation" has to be applied while the SME access to finances must still be facilitated, notes that it must be possible to suggest and pursue additional priorities on a voluntary basis and in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity; calls for suggested priority areas to include energy, education and training, and combating poverty;
Amendment 407 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)
Paragraph 37 a (new)
37a. Takes the view that new conditionality shall not result in extra administration burdens for the actors involved; encourages development of consistent, standard systems of conditionality for both the ERDF and ESF that should be objectively assessable as well;
Amendment 431 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Considers that the maximum level of support must not exceed 75%, otherwise applications will be driven less by the case for the projects than by the prospect of the funding they can attract; calls for it to be made easier for regions to use private co- financing and market-oriented credit options to cover their share of project financing;
Amendment 460 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Recognises the leverage effect of new financial instruments and their potential to mobilise investment, supports increased financing from credit in principle, and calls for the use of revolving financial instruments to be extended to more areas eligible for funding (including research and infrastructure); calls for procedures to be simplified to that end and for a greater degree of legal certainty throughout the entire funding period; takes the view that at the end of a funding period, at the latest, responsibility for how the funds are spent should transfer to national level or project level; under the current period, not all member states adopted a decentralised approach to dealing with financial instruments such as JESSICA; emphasises the need for direct access for cities.
Amendment 468 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46
Paragraph 46
46. Sees global grants at subregional level as an appropriate tool for developing independent innovation strategies in line with European structural-policy objectives; proposes that the tried and tested approach of competitive procedures should also be applied in respect of global grants;
Amendment 485 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 49
Paragraph 49
49. Regards the integration of the EU 2020 objectives into the existing system of objectives and funds as entirely feasible; rejects any division of the EU budget under the notional headings of ‘smart’, ‘inclusive’ or ‘sustainable’ growth;
Amendment 524 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54 a (new)
Paragraph 54 a (new)
54a. Calls on the Commission to maintain an annual public 'failure scoreboard' of inadequate and/or late execution of reporting and disclosure requirements and of irregularities, abuse and fraud in the use of monies from the cohesion fund; calls for this information to be broken down by Member State and Fund;
Amendment 534 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55
Paragraph 55
55. Supports the Commission’s proposal that national authorities should not receive reimbursement until the EU funding has been paid out to the beneficiaries; envisages that this will speed up payment procedures and will be a crucial incentive to carry out stringent national auditing; notes, however, that cashflow problems could potentially arise at Member State or federal-stateregional level and that appropriate hedging arrangements will have to be made;
Amendment 538 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55 c (new)
Paragraph 55 c (new)
55c. Calls for diversification of the penalty mechanisms, including among other aspects a bonus system for those Member States which comply with the implementation requirements, in particular through administrative concessions;
Amendment 547 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
56. Supports the Commission's proposal that the N+2 rule should be applied systematically possibly at the level of Member States allocations to provide for more flexibility, except in the first year of funding and that derogations from it should be abolished; considers this will guarantee that a balance is struck between high- quality investment and smooth and speedy programme implementation;
Amendment 551 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
Paragraph 57
57. Emphasises the importance in terms of cohesion policy of the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) promoting cross-border cooperation with states outside the EU; is convinced of the ultimate necessity to reincorporate the ENPI cross-border cooperation programmes into the cohesion policy's Territorial Cooperation Objective; sees infrastructure (transport and energy) links with neighbouring countries as having particularly positive effects on the European border regions; calls for ENPI funding to focus more closely on strategic needs in relation to energy and to transport infrastructure; calls on the Commission to look into the feasibility of establishing better synergies between ERDF initiatives, the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance, the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) and the European Development Fund (EDF);