632 Amendments of Jan OLBRYCHT
Amendment 35 #
2022/2172(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that these new own resources are necessary to avoid the next generation of Europeans paying the price for the repayment of the principal and the interest of the funds borrowed under NGEU, either through an increased burden on taxpayers or via cuts in regular EU programmes directly affecting beneficiaries and project-holders; notes the legitimate demand by Europeans for more social and tax justice; reiterates its strongly-held position that the costs of EURI borrowing and the repayment of debt should be placed over and above the MFF ceilings and warns against any attempt to reduce funding for ordinary EU policies to make space for the repayment of EU debt, as this would endanger long-term EU goals, such as economic convergence, research and innovation or the green transition;
Amendment 2 #
2022/2046(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 23 a (new)
Citation 23 a (new)
— having regard to the report from the World Bank, the Government of Ukraine, and the Commission of August 2022 entitled ‘the Ukraine Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment’,
Amendment 97 #
2022/2046(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Recalls, further, that, despite Parliament’s demands that the European Union Recovery Instrument (EURI) be placed over and above the ceilings, the refinancing costs are repaid from within the MFF ceilings, exerting further pressure on the MFF, especially in a context of rising interest rates; points, in that regard to the Amending Letter for the 2023 Budget, which increases appropriations on the EURI line by EUR 450 million by using two-thirds of available resources under the Single Margin Instrument, thereby curtailing the budget's ability to respond to emerging needs;
Amendment 100 #
2022/2046(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Observes the continuing demand for the EU budget to serve as a guarantee for additional macro-financial assistance (MFA); notes, however,underlines that, in the higher risksevent of default andor the large amount at stake entailwithdrawal of national guarantees, the EU budget ultimately underwrites all MFA loans and therefore significant contingent liabilities;
Amendment 143 #
2022/2046(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16 a. Considers that, while the new MFF structure with headings grouping spending by policy cluster is simpler and facilitates budgetary management within the Commission, the nomenclature - with a reduced number of budget lines and sometimes a single line covering a very large spending programme as is the case for the Asylum, Migration and Integration Fund and the Border Management and Visa Instrument - lacks the necessary granularity transparency and limits significantly proper oversight and decisions by the budgetary authority;
Amendment 220 #
2022/2046(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Recalls that payment appropriations flow directly from commitments and recalls, therefore, that any increase in the ceilings for commitments per heading will have to be accompanied by a corresponding increase in the ceiling for payments for the same or subsequent years; draws attention to the risk of an increasingly high payments backlog due to the worrying delays in programme implementation, particularly under shared management; calls on the Commission to conduct a risk analysis of payments in the context of the review and to make the necessary proposals in the revision while protecting the policies, their objectives and the preallocated national envelopes, with a view to avoiding a payment crisis that would severely affect beneficiaries of the EU budget; warns, further, about the increasing use of external assigned revenue as a substitute for appropriations under the MFF and the very acute risk that this may pose in honouring payments when the revenue is not guaranteed;
Amendment 62 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2
Recital 2
(2) This Regulation concerns the recognition in a Member State of the parenthood of a child as established in another Member State. It aims to protect the fundamental rights and other rights of children in matters concerning their parenthood in cross-border situations, including their right to an identity31 , to non-discrimination32 and to a private and family life33 , taking the best interests of the child as a primary consideration34 . This Regulation also aims to provide legal certainty and predictability and to reduce litigation costs and burden for families, national courts and other competent authorities in connection with proceedings for the recognition of parenthood in another Member State. To attain these aims, this Regulation should require Member States to recognise for all purposes the parenthood of a child as established in another Member State. _________________ 31 Article 8 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child. 32 Article 2 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 21 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. 33 Article 9 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Articles 7 and 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union. 34 Article 3 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 24 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
Amendment 64 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) Under the Treaties, the competence to adopt substantive rules on family law, such as rules on the definition of family and rules on the establishment of the parenthood of a child, lies with the Member States. However, pursuant to Article 81(3) TFEU, the Union can adopt measures concerning family law with cross-border implications, in particular rules on international jurisdiction, on applicable law and on the recognition of parenthood. In accordance with Article 67(1) TFEU the relevant legislation shall respect fundamental rights and the different legal systems of the Member States.
Amendment 88 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
(18) Article 8 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of 4 November 1950 (‘European Convention of Human Rights’) lays down the right to respect for private and family life, while Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 to the said Convention provides that the enjoyment of any right set forth by law must be secured without discrimination on any ground, including birth. The Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights has interpreted Article 8 of the Convention as requiring all States within its jurisdiction to recognise the legalrecognised, in the only case on which it had to rule, Paradiso and Campanelli v Italy (ECHR, 24 January 2017, n° 25358/12), the right of a Member State to not recognise a parenthood established abroad to the orderer of a surrogacy contract. Member States are not required to register the details of the birth certificate of a child born via surrogacy abroad in order to establish the parent- child legal relationship established abroad between a child borwith the orderer mother. The jurisprudence of the European Court of surrogacy and the biological intended parent, and to provide for a mechanism for the recognition in law of the parent- child relationship with the non-biological intended parent (for example through the adoption of the child)54 . _________________ 54 For example, Mennesson v. France (Application no 65192/11, Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights, 26 June 2014) and Advisory Opinion P16-2018-001 (Request no. P16- 2018-001, Council of Europe: European Court of Human Rights, 10 April 2019)Human Rights, without prejudice to the need for States to identify ways to ensure the protection of the child interest in the legal recognition of the link with those who de facto exercise parental responsibility, has recognised to the States a margin of discretion in identifying the ways in which to formalise the relationship with the orderer of a surrogacy contract. This orientation does not prevent the solution of the non-registration of the foreign document that recognises the parenthood to both the members of the couple that resorted to surrogacy abroad. With regard to the solution of adoption, the European Court of Human Rights has underlined that it can be considered sufficient to guarantee the protection of the rights of minors to the extent that it is capable of constituting a link of real "filiation" between adopter and adopted, and on condition that the modalities provided for by domestic law guarantee the effectiveness and speediness of its implementation, in accordance with the best interest of the child.
Amendment 98 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) In conformity with the provisions of international conventions and Union law, this Regulation should ensure that children enjoy their rights and maintain their legal status in cross-border situations without discrimination. To that effect, and in the light of the case law of the Court of Justice, including on mutual trust between Member States, and of the European Court on Human Rights, this Regulation should cover the recognition in a Member State of the parenthood established in another Member State irrespective of how the child was conceived or born and irrespective of the child’s type of family, and, including domestic adoption. Therefore, subject to the application of the rules on applicable law of this Regulation, this Regulation should cover the recognition in a Member State of the parenthood established in another Member State of a child with same-sex parents. This Regulation should also cover the recognition in a Member State of the parenthood of a child adopted domestically in another Member State under the rules governing domestic adoption in that Member State.
Amendment 110 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24
Recital 24
(24) For the purposes of this Regulation, parenthood, also referred to as filiation, may be biologic, genetic, by adoption or by operation of law. Also for the purposes of this Regulation, parenthood should mean the parent-child relationship established in law, and should cover the legal status of being the child of a particular parent or parents. This Regulation should cover the parenthood established in a Member State of both minors and adults, including a deceased child and a child not yet born, whether to a single parent, a de facto couple, a married couple or a couple in a relationship which, under the law applicable to such relationship, has comparable effects, such as a registered partnership. This Regulation should apply regardless of the nationality of the child whose parenthood is to be established, and regardless of the nationality of the parents of the child. The term ‘parent’ in this Regulation should be understood, as applicable, as referring to the legal parent, the intended parent, the person who claims to be a parent or the person in respect of whom the child claims parenthoodwhich means the person to which a child has a legally established link of filiation, may it be biologic, genetic, by adoption or by operation of law.
Amendment 127 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) The requirements for the recording of parenthood in a register should be excluded from the scope of this Regulation. It should therefore be the law of the Member State in which the register is kept that should determine under what legal conditions and how the recording must be carried out, and which authorities are in charge of checking that all requirements are met and that the documentation presented or established is sufficient or contains the necessary information. In order to avoid duplication of documents, the national registration authorities should accept the documents drawn up in another Member State by the competent authorities whose circulation is provided for by this Regulation. In particular, the European Certificate of Parenthood issued under this Regulation should constitute a valid document for the recording of parenthood in a register of a Member State. As the procedure for the issuance of the European Certificate of Parenthood and its contents and effects should be uniform in all Member States as set out in this Regulation, and the European Certificate of Parenthood should be issued in conformity with the rules on jurisdiction and applicable law laid down in this Regulation, the authorities involved in the registration should not require that the European Certificate of Parenthood be first transposed into a national document on parenthood. This should not preclude the authorities involved in the registration from confirming the conditions necessary to establish the authenticity of the European Certificate of Parenthood or from asking the person applying for registration to provide such additional information as required under the law of the Member State in which the register is kept, provided that information is not already included in the European Certificate of Parenthood. The competent authority may indicate to the person applying for registration how the missing information can be provided. The effects of recording the parenthood in a register (for example, depending on the national law, whether registration establishes parenthood or only provides evidence of the parenthood already established) should also be excluded from the scope of this Regulation and be determined by the law of the Member State in which the register is kept.
Amendment 145 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 38
Recital 38
(38) This Regulation shouldall respect the different systems for dealing with parenthood matters in the Member States. As regards 'authentic instruments', Member States often empower authorities, such as notaries, administrative authorities or registrars to draw up authentic instruments establishing parenthood with binding legal effect in the Member State in which they have been drawn up or registered (‘authentic instruments with binding legal effect’), or to draw up authentic instruments which have no binding legal effect in the Member State in which they have been drawn up or registered but which have evidentiary effects in that Member State (‘authentic instruments with no binding legal effect’). The term 'empowerment' in this Regulation is to be interpreted autonomously in accordance with the definition of 'authentic instrument' used horizontally in Union instruments and in the light of the objectives of this Regulation.
Amendment 180 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 56
Recital 56
(56) Considerations of public interest should allow courts and other competent authorities establishing parenthood in the Member States to disregard, in exceptional circumstances, certain provisions of a foreign law where, in a given case, applying such provisions would be manifestly incompatible with the public policy (ordre public) of the Member State concerned. However, the courts or other competent authorities should not be able to apply the public policy exception in order to set aside the law of another State when doing so would be contrary to the Charter and, in particular, Article 21 thereof, which prohibits discrimination, while complying with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.
Amendment 201 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 67
Recital 67
(67) The recognition in a Member State under this Regulation of a court decision establishing parenthood given in another Member State, or of an authentic instrument establishing parenthood with binding legal effect drawn up or registered in another Member State, shouldall not imply the recognition of the possible marriage or registered partnership of the parents of the child whose parenthood has been or is to be established.
Amendment 221 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 75
Recital 75
(75) Considerations of public interest should allow Member State courts or other competent authorities to refuse, in exceptional circumstances, to recognise or, as the case may be, accept a court decision or authentic instrument on the parenthood established in another Member State where, in a given case, such recognition or acceptance would be manifestly incompatible with the public policy (ordre public) of the Member State concerned. However, the courts or other competent authorities should not be able to refuse to recognise or, as the case may be, accept a court decision or an authentic instrument issued in another Member State when doing so would be contrary to the Charter and, in particular, Article 21 thereof, which prohibits discrimination, while complying with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU.
Amendment 259 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 90
Recital 90
(90) This Regulation respects the fundamental rights and observes the principles recognised in the Charter. In particular, this Regulation seeks to promote the application of Article 7 on everyone’s right to respect for their private and family life, Article 9 on the right to marry and right to found a family, Article 21 prohibiting discrimination, and Article 24 on the protection of the rights of the child.
Amendment 275 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1
1. This Regulation shall not affect the rights that a child derives from Union law, in particular the rights that a child enjoys under Union law on free movement, including Directive 2004/38/EC. In particular, tThis Regulation shall not affect the limitations relating to the use ofpreclude the Member States from using public policy as a justification to refuse the recognition of parenthood where, under Union law on free movement, Member States are obliged to recognise a document establishing a parent-child relationship issued by the authorities of another Member State for the purposes of rights derived from Union law.
Amendment 276 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Nothing in this Regulation can be interpreted as obliging a Member State to accept the practice of surrogacy, or any of its legal consequences.
Amendment 285 #
2022/0402(CNS)
2a. (j) the recognition of parenthood of orderers in a surrogacy contract, of children born of surrogacy.
Amendment 328 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1
Article 17 – paragraph 1
1. The law applicable to the establishment of parenthood shall be the national law of the Statechild ofr the habitual residence of the person giving birth at the time of birth or, where the habitual residence of the person giving birth at the time of birth cannot be determined, the law oflaw of the State of which one of the parents is a citizen at the Stattime of birth of the child.
Amendment 330 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Article 17 – paragraph 2
Amendment 383 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 31 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 31 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 427 #
2022/0402(CNS)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 39 – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. (f) if the recognition of parenthood induces the tolerance or acceptance of a contract, usually called surrogacy, through which a natural or legal person agrees with a woman that she will carry a child for the purpose of handing it upon birth, or any consequences of such a contract.
Amendment 49 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) To maximise the scope of the Union’s response, all Member States submitting a recovery and resilience plan after the entry into force of this Regulation should be required to include a REPowerEU chapter in their plan. Such amended plans, should be submitted at the latest by [two months after the entry into force of this amended Regulation]. This requirement should apply, in particular, to revised plans submitted by Member States from 30 June 2022 to take into account the updated maximum financial contribution. The Commission should evaluate the amended plans in maximum one month from their official submission.
Amendment 56 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6
Recital 6
(6) The REPowerEU chapter should include new reforms and investments contributing to the REPowerEU aims, as well as to providing a comprehensive response to the effects of the crisis stemming from the Russian military aggression against Ukraine. Furthermore, that chapter should contain an outline of other measures, financed from sources other than the Recovery and Resilience Facility, contributing to the energy-related objectives outlined in recital (3). The outline should cover measures whose implementation should take place between 1 February 2022 to 31 December 2026, the period during which the objectives set by this Regulation are to be achieved. As regards natural gas infrastructure, the investments and reforms of the REPowerEU chapters to diversify supply away from Russia should build on the needs currently identified through the assessment conducted and agreed by the European Network of Transmission System Operators for Gas (ENTSOG), established in the spirit of solidarity as regards security of supply and take into account the reinforced preparedness measures taken to adapt to new geopolitical threats. Finally, the REPowerEU chapters should provide an explanation and a quantification of the effects of the combination of the reforms and investments financed by the Recovery and Resilience Facility and the other measures financed by other sources than the Recovery and Resilience Facility.
Amendment 69 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) An effective transition towards green energy and a reduction of energy dependency involves significant digital investments. In light of Regulation (EU) 2021/241, Member States should provide an explanation of how the measures in the recovery and resilience plan, including those included in the REPowerEU chapter, are expected to contribute to the digital transition or the challenges resulting therefrom and whetherhow they account for an amount contributing to the digital target based on the methodology for digital tagging. However, given the unprecedented urgency and importance of energy challenges faced by the Union, reforms and investments included in the REPowerEU chapter should not be taken into account when calculatGiven the specific nature of measures included in the REPowerEU chapter, the digital tagging methodology should be adapted exclusively for the measures included ing the plan’s total allocation for the purpose of applying the digital target requirement set by Regulation (EU) 2021/241se chapters to facilitate reaching the digital target.
Amendment 73 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Pursuant to Article 18(4) point (q) of Regulation (EU) 2021/241, the Member States should also provide a summary of the mandatory consultation process of local and regional authorities and other relevant stakeholders, including, as relevant, from the agricultural sector, for reforms and investments included in the REPowerEU chapter. Such summaries should explain the outcome of those consultations and outline how the input received was reflected in REPowerEU chapters. The Commission should evaluate if these consultations ensure that all relevant stakeholders are given effective opportunities to participate in the preparation and the implementation of the recovery and resilience plans.
Amendment 86 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13 a (new)
Recital 13 a (new)
(13 a) Cross-border and multi country projects, particularly those in the field of energy have an important contribution to the achievement of the REPowerEU objectives. It is for this reason that the REPowerEU chapters should contain measures allocating at least 50% of the financial allocation for these chapters to cross-border or multi country projects.
Amendment 91 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 14
Recital 14
(14) Further incentives should be provided for Member States to request loans, through the clarification of the loan allocation procedure. In accordance with Regulation (EU) 2021/241, Member States may request loans until 31 August 2023. An intention to submit a loan request should be communicated to the Commission 30 days after the entry into force of this Regulation so that the redistribution of the remaining funds can be conducted in an orderly manner and for the Member State to be able to request such support at a later stage.
Amendment 117 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20 a (new)
Recital 20 a (new)
Amendment 135 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 14 – Paragraph 6
Article 14 – Paragraph 6
6. By derogation from paragraph 5, subject to the availability of resources, in exceptional circumstances the amount of the loan support may be increased, considering the needs of the requesting Member State, as well as requests for loan support already submitted or planned to be submitted by other Member States, while applying the principles of equal treatment, solidarity, proportionality and transparency. To facilitate the application of these principles, Member States shall communicate to the Commission within 30 days after [the entry into force of this amending Regulation], whether they intend to request loan support.will submit requests for loan support. The communication of such intention will constitute a binding commitment of the Member State to request the respective amounts. Only Member States that have informed the Commission of their intention to request any available loan support may subsequently submit such requests.’
Amendment 140 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – point f
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – point f
(2 a) Article 18 (4) point f is the replaced by the following "(f)an explanation of how the measures in the recovery and resilience plan are expected to contribute to the digital transition or to the challenges resulting therefrom, and whether they account for an amount which represents at least 20 % of the recovery and resilience plan’s total allocation, based on the methodology for digital tagging set out in Annex VII; that methodology shall be used accordingly for measures that cannot be directly assigned to an intervention field listed in Annex VII, with the exception of new measures included in the REPowerEU chapters, for which the Commission may use new intervention fields and coefficients; the coefficients for support for the digital objectives may be increased for individual investments to take account of accompanying reform measures that increase their impact on the digital objectives; (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R0241) " Or. en
Amendment 141 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 b (new)
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – point h
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – point h
(2 b) Article 18 (4) point h is replaced by the following "(h)an indication of whether the measures included in the recovery and resilience plan comprise cross-border or multi-country projects; and if the REPowerEU chapters allocate at least 50% of the total financial allocation of the chapter to cross-border or multi country projects; an explanation of how the included cross-border and/or multi country projects contribute to the objectives outlined in Article 21c (1); " Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R0241)
Amendment 151 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – point q
Article 18 – paragraph 4 – point q
(q) for the preparation and, where available, for the implementation of the recovery and resilience plan, a summary of the consultation process, which shall be mandatory and conducted in accordance with the national legal framework, of national parliaments, local and regional authorities, social partners, civil society organisations, youth organisations and other relevant stakeholders, and how the input of the stakeholders is reflected in the recovery and resilience plan; in particular, the summary of the consultation process shall explain the outcome of the consultations with local and regional authorities and other relevant stakeholders on reforms and investments included in the REPowerEU chapter and outline how the input received was reflected in the REPowerEU chapter;
Amendment 158 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(f) whether the recovery and resilience plan contains measures that effectively contribute to the digital transition or to addressing the challenges resulting therefrom, and whether they account for an amount which represents at least 20 % of the recovery and resilience plan’s total allocation, based on the methodology for digital tagging set out in Annex VII with the exception of new measures included in the REPowerEU chapters, for which the Commission may use new intervention fields and coefficients; that methodology shall be used accordingly for measures that cannot be directly assigned to an intervention field listed in Annex VII; the coefficients for support for the digital objectives may be increased for individual investments to take account of accompanying reform measures that increase their impact on the digital objectives; (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R0241)Or. en
Amendment 159 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – point fa (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – point fa (new)
Amendment 162 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – point ka (new)
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – point ka (new)
(ka) whether the consultations held for the preparation of the recovery and resilience plan ensure that all relevant stakeholders are given effective opportunities to participate in the preparation and the implementation of the recovery and resilience plans;
Amendment 164 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 20 – paragraph 6
Article 20 – paragraph 6
(4 a) In Article 20 (6) the following sentence is inserted: "6. The arrangements and timetable for monitoring and implementation as referred to in point (e) of paragraph 5, the relevant indicators relating to the fulfilment of the envisaged milestones and targets referred to in point (f) of paragraph 5, the arrangements for providing full access by the Commission to the underlying data referred to in point (g) of paragraph 5, and, where appropriate, the additional milestones and targets related to the payment of the loan referred to in point (h) of paragraph 5 shall be further specified in operational arrangements to be agreed by the Member State concerned and the Commission after the adoption of the decision referred to in paragraph 1. (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R0241)The operational arrangements shall be concluded at the latest one month after the decision referred to in paragraph 1. " Or. en
Amendment 165 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 b (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 b (new)
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 21 – paragraph 1
Article 21 – paragraph 1
(4 b) Article 21 (1) is replaced by the following "1. Where the recovery and resilience plan including relevant milestones and targets is no longer achievable, either partially or totally, by the Member State concerned because of objective circumstances, including the crisis caused by Russia's military aggression against Ukraine, or where new measures are required to tackle the effects of this crisis, the Member State concerned may make a reasoned request to the Commission to make a proposal to amend or replace the Council implementing decisions referred to in Article 20(1) and (3). To that end, the Member State may propose an amended or a new recovery and resilience plan. Member States may request technical support for the preparation of such proposal under the Technical Support Instrument. " Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R0241)
Amendment 167 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 c (new)
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4 c (new)
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 21 – paragraph 2
Article 21 – paragraph 2
(4 c) Article 21 (2) is replaced by the following: "2. Where the Commission considers that the reasons put forward by the Member State concerned justify an amendment of the relevant recovery and resilience plan, the Commission shall assess the amended or new recovery and resilience plan in accordance with Article 19 and shall make a proposal for a new Council implementing decision in accordance with Article 20(1) within twoone months of the official submission of the request. The Member State concerned and the Commission may agree to extend that deadline by a reasonable period if necessary. The Council shall adopt the new implementing decision, as a rule, within four weeks of the adoption of the Commission proposal. (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R0241)" Or. en
Amendment 216 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 21c – paragraph 1
Article 21c – paragraph 1
(1) The recovery and resilience plan submitted to the Commission after [the entry into force of this amending Regulation] shall contain a REPowerEU chapter. Member States may propose the inclusion of a REPowerEU chapter in their recovery and resilience plans at the latest by [2 months after the entry into force of this amending Regulation]. The REPowerEU chapter shall outline reforms and investments, with their corresponding milestones and targets, other than measures referred in paragraph 2 (a), aiming to contribute to the REPowerEU objectives, by:
Amendment 257 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 21c – paragraph 3
Article 21c – paragraph 3
Amendment 260 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Article 21c – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 21c – paragraph 3 a (new)
(3 a) At least 50% of the total financial allocation of the REPowerEU chapters shall be used to finance exclusively cross- border or multi country investments and reforms contributing to the objectives outlined in Article 21c (1).
Amendment 310 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point a
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point a
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Annex V – section 2 – point 2.12 a (new)
Annex V – section 2 – point 2.12 a (new)
2.12 a. The REPowerEU chapters of the recovery and resilience plan allocates at least 50% of the overall financial allocation to cross-border or multi country measures. Rating: A - the REPowerEU chapters allocate at least 50% of the overall allocation to cross-border or multi country measures C - the REPowerEU chapters do not allocate at least 50% of the overall allocation to cross-border or multi country measures
Amendment 311 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point a
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point a
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Annex V – section 2 – point 2.12 b (new)
Annex V – section 2 – point 2.12 b (new)
2.12 b. The consultations conducted in accordance with the national framework for the preparation of the recovery and resilience plan were conducted in a way which ensure that all relevant stakeholders are given effective opportunities to participate in the preparation and the implementation of the recovery and resilience plans. The Commission shall take into account the following elements for the assessment under this criterion Scope: - the Member State provided a comprehensive summary about the consultation process conducted in accordance with the national legislative framework and - the Member State consulted all relevant stakeholders, including national parliaments, local and regional authorities, social partners, civil society organisations, youth organisations and other relevant stakeholders and - the Member State has taken into account to a sufficient degree the input provided by the relevant stakeholders in the recovery and resilience plan and - the Member State has provided sufficient arrangements to ensure the participation of the relevant stakeholders in the implementation of the recovery and resilience plans Rating A – to a large extent B – to a medium extent C – to a small extent
Amendment 313 #
2022/0164(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Annex I – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Regulation (EU) 2021/241
Annex V – section 2 – point 2.6
Annex V – section 2 – point 2.6
(a a) Annex V - Section 2 - Point 2.6 is replaced by the following: "2.6. The recovery and resilience plan contains measures that effectively contribute to the digital transition or to addressing the challenges resulting therefrom, and that account for an amount which represents at least 20 % of the recovery and resilience plan’s total allocation, based on the methodology for digital tagging set out in Annex VII, with the exception of the REPowerEU chapter for which the Commission may use additional intervention fields and coefficients; that methodology shall be used accordingly for measures that cannot be directly assigned to an intervention field listed in Annex VII; the coefficients for support for the digital objectives may be increased for individual investments to take account of accompanying reform measures that increase their impact on the digital objectives. The Commission shall take into account the following elements for the assessment under this criterion: Scope —the implementation of the envisaged measures is expected to significantly contribute to the digital transformation of economic or social sectors; or —the implementation of the envisaged measures is expected to significantly contribute to address the challenges resulting from digital transition; and —Member States apply a methodology consisting of assigning a specific weighting to the support provided, which reflects the extent to which such support makes a contribution to digital objectives. The weightings shall be based on the dimensions and codes for the types of intervention established in Annex VII, with the exception of the REPowerEU chapter for which the Commission may use additional intervention fields and coefficients, and may be increased for individual investments to take account of accompanying reform measures that increase their impact on the digital objectives. The same weighting system shall apply for measures that cannot be directly assigned to an intervention field listed in Annex VII; and —the implementation of the envisaged measures is expected to have a lasting impact. Rating A –to a large extent B –to a moderate extent C –to a small extent " Or. en (https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A32021R0241)
Amendment 5 #
2022/0126(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is deeply concerned that the MFF is already pushed to its limits and is not fit to continue addressing the multiple internal and external crises in a sustainable manner; points, in particular, to the need to increase the ceiling of Heading 4 in order to reflect the actual financial needs for the Union’s migration and border management; therefore, calls on the Commission to conduct an in-depth review of the functioning of the current MFF and proceed with a legislative proposal for a comprehensive MFF revision as soon as possible and not later than the first quarter of 2023; expects such a revision to take into account the long-term implications of the war in Ukraine and the emergency measures taken;
Amendment 34 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights that the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF) is an unprecedented one-off and limited in time instrument of solidarity and a cornerstone of the NextGenerationEU (NGEU) instrument, ending in 2026, as the main tool in the EU’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic to prepare the economies of the EU to face the new challenges; recalls that the EU response was comprehensive and timely, leading to extensive use of existing instruments and deploying additional financing instruments;
Amendment 53 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the fact that even if the economic effects of the RRF cannot be fully disentangled from other developments, it seems fair to conclude that, so far, the RRF has had positive effects on gross domestic product (GDP) and that its the effective implementation of the RRF will be a key for the EU’s economic growthpositive impact on the EU GDP; recognises that the RRF has helped to cushion EU economies and citizens from the most acute impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and is positively contributing to the EU’sEU recovery and resiliencegrowth, including economic cohesion, jobs, productivity,competitiveness, research, development and innovation, and a well- functioning internal market with strong small and medium enterprises (SMEs);
Amendment 58 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Believes that in order for the RRF to attain its objectives and support the EU to bounce back from the crisis, it is imperative that Member States implement thoroughly the agreed reforms and investments; reminds that the RRF is an incentive-based mechanism, whereby funding is disbursed upon completion of milestones and targets related to reforms;
Amendment 68 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Points out that a successful implementation of the RRF would lay down the foundations for long term competitive, strategically autonomous, sustainable, inclusive and resilient economies and societies;
Amendment 117 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Is concerned, however, that only seven Member States have requested loans amounting to a total of EUR 166 billion out of the EUR 385.8 billion available for loans, leaving a considerable amount available should Member States require loans at a later stage; is preoccupied that the limited interest for the loan component may lead to lost opportunities and prevent the RRF from reaching its full potential; underlines that should Member States, whose NRRPs have been already approved, wish to request loans, it will require amending respective NRRP with the additional set of measures consisting of reforms and investments, without rolling back commitments in the plans already endorsed; encourages Member States to use full potential of the RRF; reminds that a Member State may request loan support at the time of the submission of a recovery and resilience plan or at a different moment in time until 31 August 2023;
Amendment 123 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Encourages those Member States that did not request loans to the full extent available, to do so and prioritise measures aiming at increasing their energy security and mitigating the economic effects of the crisis generated by the Russian invasion of Ukraine in the European Union.
Amendment 141 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. Insists that any amendment of the NRRPs shall fully comply with the provisions of the RRF Regulation and supports the Commission’s approach that the mere change of the political situation in Member States does not represent an objective reason for requesting an amendment of the NRRP; reminds Member States that requests for modifications of NRRPs, must comply with the timelines of the Regulation and will likely lead to delays in the implementation of the reforms and investments, will, subsequently, increase the risk of failing to meet agreed targets and milestones and, ultimately, incapacity of using of the entire RRF allocation or losing part of the funding;
Amendment 155 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11 a. Believes that in order to demonstrate its added value, the RRF should focus on investments which could not be adequately financed through other funding instruments of the Union or would have difficulty in obtaining the adequate financing;
Amendment 160 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Recalls that the RRF Regulation provides for the possibility to include in the NRRPs measures started from 1 February 2020 onwards and that some Member States have made use of this possibility rather extensively; believes that the entire concept of “retroactive reforms” and its extensive use is not in line with the spirit of the RRF objectives; urges the Commission to refrain from approving further “retroactive reforms”, particularly reforms which were already planned before the set up of the RRF and the emergence of the pandemic;
Amendment 166 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14 a. Regrets that among the initial payment requests, in some instances, some Member States make extensive use of the retroactivity clause, particularly as regards the reforms component; is of the opinion, that some of the reforms included in the first payment claims were already planned before the emergence of the pandemic and the set up of the RRF and thus should not receive funding from the instrument;
Amendment 171 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14 b. Reminds that the Facility is subject to the sound economic governance and calls on the Commission to apply the existing rules scrupulously;
Amendment 176 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Welcomes the fact that 22 NRRPs have been approved and observes that as of early February 2022, one Member State had not yet put forward its NRRP; further notes that four NRRPs are pending assessment by the Commission; is concerned that some of the plans have been under assessment for a considerable time;
Amendment 192 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Calls on the Commission to apply diligently the RRF rules when assessing the remaining plans; reminds the Commission that the RRF is subject to the Rule of Law conditionality regime and calls on refraining from approving NRRPs in case of concerns regarding the observance of rule of law and the sound financial management of EU funds, prevention, detection and fight against fraud, conflict of interests and corruption; furthermore, recalls that the observance of rule of law and the sound financial management of EU funds are to be evaluated continuously throughout the lifecycle of the RRF and that the Commission shall refrain to disburse funding and, where applicable, recover funds, in case such conditions are no longer fulfilled; reminds Member States that the failure to fully comply with the provisions of the Regulation and the subsequent delays in the approval of the NRRPs, seriously affect the capacity of local and regional authorities in adequately tackling the impact of the pandemic on their communities, businesses and citizens and can lead to a long term worsening of the local and regional economic situation;
Amendment 224 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Notes that the Commission estimates social spending in the NRRPs to account forMember States’ RRPs at around 20 % of the grants and loans requested; observes that thisose expenditure focuses on employment incentives for specific disadvantaged groups, reforms of employment protection legislation and labour contract regulation; regrets that social investment measures have been rather limited to social infrastructure and that only somsupport the Commission to build through the RRF a more resilient and inclusive labour market; is of the opinion, however, that social expenditure financed though the NRRPs contain measures for the development of proper care services and temporary support measures; supports the Commission’s aim, through the RRF, of building a more resilient and inclusive labour marketF must not replace nor become recurring budgetary expenditure and shall be strictly linked with the overall objectives of the RRF, namely to support the post-crisis economic recovery;
Amendment 249 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25 a. Observes that almost all approved RRPs contain investment in digital education, making up about 30% of the total spending on education; welcomes the focus on the modernisation of education systems in the Member States;
Amendment 254 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. EStrongly emphasises that the RRF should not be used to substitute recurring national budgetary expenditure, unless duly justified; notes that the Commission has only approved NRRPs to cover the initial costs of setting up and launching reforms, which might become recurring costs, if the sustainable financing of the future costs shall be ensured from the national budget or other instruments and it fully respects the concept of sustainable fiscal policy; is deeply preoccupied by measures included in some NRRPs which foresee important amounts for salaries; believes that such expenditure has the clear potential to become recurring budgetary expenditure after the RRF implementation period; strongly questions the criteria on which the Commission has approved such measures; believes that RRF expenditure should not lead to an increase of public spending;
Amendment 276 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Believes that NRRPs would benefit from further cross-border projects in order to enhance spill-over effects and contribute to EU added value; believes that further cross-border measures should have been included in the NRRPs in order to enhance its spill-over effect and to boost its EU added value;
Amendment 279 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29 a. Observes that one Member State proposed to transfer structural funds to its NRRP, that only two Member States plan to provision their Invest EU envelopes with RRF funds and that only three Member States foresee incorporating the costs of technical support in their NRRPs; regrets that the provision to transfer RRF funds to the InvestEU national compartments has not been used to its full potential; recalls that synergies among different EU funds is essential for a proper recovery and consolidated resilience of the Union and reminds Member States that the use of this provision contributes to enhancing synergies;
Amendment 281 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 b (new)
Paragraph 29 b (new)
29 b. Reminds that according to the RRF Regulation the recovery and resilience plans shall also be consistent with the information included by the Member States in the partnership agreements and operational programmes under Union funds; reiterates that this provision is not only important to avoid double-funding or overlapping of objectives, but also to ensure a coordinated approach and maximise the benefits of EU funding; requests the Commission to provide an analysis how this coordination is ensured; takes note that the adoption of the NRRPs has led in some instances to the delays in the adoption of Partnership Agreements and calls on these delays to be addressed;
Amendment 283 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 c (new)
Paragraph 29 c (new)
29 c. Questions how the Commission has encouraged Member States to foster synergies with NRRPs of other Member States;
Amendment 288 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. NReminds that all RRPs have to contribute to effectively addressing all or a significant subset of challenges identified in the relevant country-specific recommendations including fiscal aspects; notes the Commission assessment that all NRRPs address at least a significant subset of challenges identified in the relevant European Semester recommendations but that not all challenges are addressedchallenges remain; deplores that some Member States are not sufficiently tackling some long-standing challenges, particularly as regards the fiscal sustainability or the reform of the labour and pensions systems as well as other structural reforms; strongly questions in this regard the positive evaluation of the Commission of some of the NRRPs which fail to propose serious structural reforms deplores that in some instances, NRRPs have been approved although the final design of important structural reforms had not been finalised by the Member States concerned, nor finally agreed with the Commission;
Amendment 293 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 a (new)
Paragraph 30 a (new)
30 a. Reiterates the fact that not all CSRs are equally important and regrets the quantitative approach of the Commission when evaluating the NRRPs in relation to the fulfilment of challenges identified in the relevant CSRs, whereby important structural challenges have not been properly addressed
Amendment 295 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 b (new)
Paragraph 30 b (new)
30 b. Calls on the Commission to step up its evaluation of the fulfilment of CSRs in the NRRPs in the disbursement phase of the Facility and to refrain from making any payments if agreed milestones and targets related to challenges in the relevant CSRs are not adequately met, including not rolling back on previously met milestones and targets; furthermore calls on the Commission, if necessary, to make full use of the provisions of the Regulation, allowing it to recover grants or ask for early repayment of loans in case of breach of the obligations of Member States under the financing agreements, including in relation to the implementation of CSRs;
Amendment 296 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 c (new)
Paragraph 30 c (new)
30 c. Calls on the Members States to look for ways on how to involve refugees fleeing Ukraine to the European Union, following the military invasion of the Russian Federation, in the practical implementation of the NRRPs, therefore, helping to alleviate their socio-economic situation;
Amendment 297 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30 d (new)
Paragraph 30 d (new)
30 d. Reiterates, in the context of the Russian invasion of Ukraine and its possible consequences, particularly as regards the dependence on Russian gas, the importance of EU's energy security; welcomes in this regard the NRRPs containing measures to enhance energy security by decreasing dependence on Russian gas; furthermore, underlines the importance of measures relating to the climate component in order to mitigate the impact of the energy prices crisis upon the EU;
Amendment 307 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32
Paragraph 32
32. Observes, that by the nature of the instruments, the control focuses on the achievement of results instead of verifications of costs; notes that this approach can simplify the implementation and contribute to the achievement of the desired outcome; nevertheless, is deeply preoccupied that it also makes the detection of abuse of EU funds more difficult; Urges the Commission to take the appropriate measures to ensure early detection of abuse of EU funds; calls on it to monitor rigorously any possible occurrence of double funding and, if such occurrences are confirmed, to proceed with the recovery of funds without delay;
Amendment 324 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 a (new)
Paragraph 33 a (new)
33 a. Reminds the Commission that in the evaluation of NRRPs and payment claims it can be assisted by experts and invites to make full use of this provision, particularly if it lacks the in-house capacity to thoroughly scrutinise the plans or the fulfilment of milestones and targets; is concerned that the Council does not have sufficient capacity to analyse NRRPs or payment claims and warns against transforming this evaluation into a mere box-ticking exercise;
Amendment 330 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 b (new)
Paragraph 33 b (new)
33 b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that adequate control capacities are in place and that the Commission, OLAF, the Court of Auditors and where applicable the EPPO are granted full access by Member States to information to exert their rights according to the Financial Regulation and the RRF Regulation;
Amendment 332 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 c (new)
Paragraph 33 c (new)
33 c. Calls on the Court of Auditors, OLAF and EPPO to make full use of their role under the RRF Regulation and scrutinise thoroughly all RRF spending, in order to prevent, detect, correct and investigate fraud, corruption, conflict of interests and where applicable to impose administrative penalties, as well as to avoid double funding;
Amendment 335 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 d (new)
Paragraph 33 d (new)
33 d. Reiterates the importance of the Commission undertaking a continuous, including ex-post, monitoring of the RRF expenditure; believes that full transparency is needed from the Member States, including as regards implementation and management data, in order to analyse the results of the RRF and identify possible weaknesses;
Amendment 336 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 e (new)
Paragraph 33 e (new)
33 e. Reminds that in the framework of the discharge procedure to the Commission, in accordance with Article 319 TFEU, the Facility shall be subject to reporting under the integrated financial and accountability reporting referred to in Article 247 of the Financial Regulation, and, in particular, separately in the Annual Management and Performance Report.
Amendment 337 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33 f (new)
Paragraph 33 f (new)
33 f. Calls on all Member States to collect and record data on final recipients and beneficiaries of Union funding in an electronic standardised and interoperable format and to use the single data mining tool provided by the Commission; furthermore, reiterates the importance of digitalising all reporting, monitoring and audit;
Amendment 340 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Reaffirms Parliament’s role in scrutinising the implementation of the RRF, in particular through five plenary debates held in 2021, two adopted resolutions, four Recovery and Resilience Dialogues held with the Commission in 2021, 20 meetings of the dedicated working group on the scrutiny of the RRF, parliamentary questions, and the regular flow of information and ad hoc requests for information from the Commission; remains committed in ensuring that it will make full use of the entire range of possibilities offered by the Regulation to scrutinise RRF spending, including via local actions in the Member States.
Amendment 345 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 a (new)
Paragraph 34 a (new)
34 a. Invites the Commission to follow an open, transparent and constructive approach during the recovery and resilience dialogues and to observe the provision of Article 26(1)as regards regular interactions with the Parliament; calls to set up a schedule of the recovery and resilience dialogues for the rest of the year, instead of ad-hoc solutions.
Amendment 350 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 b (new)
Paragraph 34 b (new)
34 b. Deplores that national parliaments, regions and municipalities have had a limited or even no involvement in designing national plans; recalls that regions and municipalities are at the forefront of RRP implementation and demands the Commission and the Member States to ensure proper and deep involvement of regions and municipalities, social partners, civil society, youth organisations and other relevant stakeholders;
Amendment 352 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 c (new)
Paragraph 34 c (new)
34 c. Reiterates that the RRF is not a political instrument, but an unprecedented instrument to support citizens and businesses, and calls on the Commission to ensure that Member States do not allocate funding based on political criteria; calls on the Commission to ensure that calls for proposals for RRF funding at national level are competitive and allow for a level playing field as regards the access for regions and municipalities; warns against “tailored- made” calls for proposals at national level whereby criteria are specifically designed for one competitor; calls on the Commission and other institutions involved in the control system to investigate such cases and take all required measures;
Amendment 356 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 d (new)
Paragraph 34 d (new)
34 d. Calls on Member States to ensure that management systems of RRF funds takes into consideration the specific needs of the regional and local level and to put in place management systems that allow for RRF expenditure related to local and regional objectives to be de-centralised;
Amendment 357 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 e (new)
Paragraph 34 e (new)
34 e. Reiterates the importance of allowing access to private sector to RRF expenditure, where applicable; recalls the importance of SMEs in the implementation of the RRF and warns against measures which would prevent SMEs from accessing RRF funding; invites the Commission to provide detailed analyses on the access of the private sector to RRF funding;
Amendment 359 #
2021/2251(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34 f (new)
Paragraph 34 f (new)
34 f. Reminds that according to the RRF regulation the Commission shall implement information and communication actions relating to the Facility, to actions taken pursuant to the Facility and to the results obtained; and that the Commission shall where appropriate inform the representation offices of the European Parliament of its actions and involve them in those actions;
Amendment 49 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15a) The Social Climate Plans should set out a summary of the conducted consultation process with local and regional authorities, social partners, civil society organisations, including those representing young people, and other relevant national stakeholders.
Amendment 96 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 1
(1) ‘building renovation’ means all kinds of energy-related building renovation, including the insulation of the building envelope, that is to say walls, roof, floor, the replacement of windows, the replacement of heating, cooling and cooking appliances, the upgrade of electrical installations and the installation of on-site production of energy from renewable sources, and including safety- related renovation works undertaken at the same time, such as seismic protection, electrical safety, smoke detection and alarms;
Amendment 117 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) finance measures and investments to increase energy efficiency of buildings and ensure their safety, to implement energy efficiency improvement measures, to carry out building renovation, and to decarbonise heating and cooling of buildings, including the integration of energy production from renewable energy sources;
Amendment 119 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Each Member State shall consult, in accordance with its national legal framework, local and regional authorities, social partners, civil society organisations, including those representing young people, and other relevant stakeholders on its draft plan before submitting the Plan to the Commission.
Amendment 122 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15 a (new)
Recital 15 a (new)
(15 a) The Social Climate Plans should set out a summary of the conducted consultation process with local and regional authorities, social partners, civil society organisations, including those representing young people, and other relevant national stakeholders.
Amendment 136 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) for the preparation and, where available, for the implementation of the Plan, a summary of the consultation process provided for in Article 3(3a), conducted in accordance with Article 10 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 and with the national legal framework, of local and regional authorities, social partners, civil society organisations, youth organisations and other relevant stakeholders, and how the input of the stakeholders is reflected in the Plan;
Amendment 141 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point e a (new)
(ea) improvement in safety.
Amendment 146 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(ca) support in inclusion of adequate safety measures within building renovations;
Amendment 176 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b – point iii a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b – point iii a (new)
(iiia) whether the appropriate consultation for the preparation of the Plan was conducted in accordance with Article 3(3a).
Amendment 253 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point a
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – point a
(a) finance measures and investments to increase energy efficiency of buildings and ensure their safety, to implement energy efficiency improvement measures, to carry out building renovation, and to decarbonise heating and cooling of buildings, including the integration of energy production from renewable energy sources;
Amendment 262 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
Article 3 – paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Each Member State shall consult, in accordance with its national legal framework, local and regional authorities, social partners, civil society organisations, including those representing young people, and other relevant stakeholders on its draft plan before submitting the Plan to the Commission;
Amendment 295 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point j
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point j
(j) for the preparation and, where available, for the implementation of the Plan, a summary of the consultation process provided for in Article 3(4),, conducted in accordance with Article 10 of Regulation (EU) 2018/1999 and with the national legal framework, of local and regional authorities, social partners, civil society organisations, youth organisations and other relevant stakeholders, and how the input of the stakeholders is reflected in the Plan;
Amendment 346 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 2 – point c a (new)
(c a) support in inclusion of adequate safety measures within building renovations;
Amendment 425 #
2021/0206(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b – point iii a (new)
Article 15 – paragraph 2 – point b – point iii a (new)
(iii a) whether the appropriate consultation for the preparation of the Plan was conducted in accordance with Article 3(4);
Amendment 6 #
2020/2051(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas on 2 May 2018, the Commission presented a set of legislative proposals on the 2021-2027 MFF and Union Own Resources, followed by legislative proposals for the setting-up of new Union programmes and instruments; whereas this proposal entailed an overall MFF ceiling of EUR 1 134.6 billion in 2018 prices, or 1,11 % of the pre-crisis EU-27’s GNI1a (including 0,03 % from the European Development Fund), which was already lower than the estimated 1,16 % of the 2014-2020 MFF in relation to the EU- 27’s GNI (EUR 1 082.3 billion in 2018 prices), with the stated objective to provide a basis for a swift negotiation to be concluded before the Parliament elections of 2019; _________________ 1aGross National Income as forecast at the time of presentation of the MFF proposal on 2 May 2018, not taking into account subsequent and upcoming evolutions notably as a result of the Corona emergency.
Amendment 9 #
2020/2051(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas Parliament adopted on 14 November 2018 its interim report with detailed figures, amounting to an overall MFF ceiling of EUR 1 324.1 billion in 2018 prices (1,30 % of the EU-27’s GNI), and amendments constituting its negotiating mandate and has stood ready, since then, to enter into negotiations with the Council;
Amendment 21 #
2020/2051(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the Covid-19 outbreak has overshadowed the MFF-related debate and will, despite highlighting the importance and the potential of a strong EU budget, has further delayed the European Council in reaching its conclusions’s debate and agreement on the next MFF and is affecting the conditions in which interinstitutional negotiations could be carried out;
Amendment 26 #
2020/2051(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas the basic acts of a considerable number of the current expenditure programmes however contain expiry dates that, together with lack of operational preparedness, might undermine the safety net provided by the TFEU; whereas those expiry dates would have to be extended or lifted in order to be brought into consistency with the principles underpinning Article 312(4) TFEU and to avoid a shutdown of the concerned programmes, which would be to the detriment of its beneficiaries and of the Union as a whole, especially in times of crisis;
Amendment 29 #
2020/2051(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O a (new)
Recital O a (new)
O a. whereas the Covid-19 makes it even more compelling to eliminate any risk of discontinuity or disorderly extension of the current MFF and programmes; whereas it becomes increasingly important to guarantee that the Union will be enabled to carry out its operations and to provide an ambitious crisis response and recovery strategy despite the uncertain date of the entry into force of a new MFF; whereas the Commission should deliver to stakeholders an unequivocal message in that respect;
Amendment 31 #
2020/2051(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Recital O b (new)
Recital O b (new)
Amendment 38 #
2020/2051(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Requests the MFF contingency plan to: – lift or extend the time limits laid down in the basic acts of all relevant MFF expenditure programmes; – where legally necessary notably under shared management programmes, update the relevant financial amounts on the basis of a technical prolongation of the 2020 levels; – revise the rules and objectives governing the relevant expenditure programmes so that they can be temporarily refocused on addressing the immediate economic and social consequences of the Covid-19 outbreak and on helping in the economic recovery; – allow for targeted reinforcements to this end; – allow for the setting-up of the most urgent new instruments and initiatives;
Amendment 42 #
2020/2051(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point 1
Annex I – part A – point 1
1. The MFF contingency plan aims at providing a safety net to protect the beneficiaries of the Union programmes in the event that the 2021-2027 MFF could not be agreed in time to enter into force on 1 January 2021. The MFF contingency plan should ensure a satisfactory degree of predictability and continuity in Union budget implementation; . Furthermore, it should enable the Union to provide a response to the immediate social and economic consequences of the Covid-19 outbreak and to work on the recovery;
Amendment 46 #
2020/2051(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point 2
Annex I – part A – point 2
2. The MFF contingency plan shall include one or several legislative proposal(s) to lift or extend the time limits laid down in the basic acts of all concerned expenditure programmes and, where legally necessary notably under shared management programmes, update the relevant financial amounts on the basis of a technical prolongation of the 2020 levels. The legislative proposal(s) should also include a temporary refocusing of the objectives of all the relevant expenditure programmes, so that they can best address the immediate consequences of the Covid- 19 outbreak. For the same purpose, wherever relevant, the proposal(s) should include a re-adjustment of the rules to allow for maximum flexibility in the implementation notably of shared management programmes, including the prolongation of all legislative measures adopted in 2020, in response to the crisis;
Amendment 49 #
2020/2051(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point 2 a (new)
Annex I – part A – point 2 a (new)
2 a. The MFF contingency plan should allow for targeted reinforcements of the relevant expenditure programmes in the 2021 budget and for the setting-up of the most urgent new instruments, measures and programmes, especially relating to a recovery plan after the Covid-19 outbreak;
Amendment 58 #
2020/2051(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part A – point 4
Annex I – part A – point 4
4. The measures necessary for the implementation of the contingency plan shall be financed through the annual budget, within the limits of the MFF ceilings for 2020 and of the flexibility provisions of the 2014-2020 MFF, as extended in accordance with Article 312(4) TFEU, i.e. on the basis of a technical prolongation of the amounts already agreed by the budgetary authority in 2020, increased by the 2% deflator, and of any of the additional abovementioned initiatives. This technical prolongation should also determine the national envelopes under the shared management programmes.
Amendment 61 #
2020/2051(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – part B – point 1
Annex I – part B – point 1
1. One or several legislative proposal(s) to: – lift or extend the time limits laid down in the basic acts of all relevant MFF expenditure programmes and, – where legally necessary notably under shared management programmes, update the relevant financial amounts on the basis of a technical prolongation of the 2020 levels, – revise the rules and objectives governing the relevant expenditure programmes so that they can be temporarily refocused on addressing the immediate economic and social consequences of the Covid-19 outbreak and on helping in the economic recovery.
Amendment 719 #
2020/0104(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 6 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Paid out RRF funds that Member States used incorrectly must be repaid. These funds are to be used to compensate for the cuts in the MFF or the forthcoming budgets in the fields of research, energy transition, transport networks and education.
Amendment 167 #
2020/0006(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point d
(d) investment related to the production, processing, distribution, storage or combustion of fossil fuels except for natural gas high efficiency co- generation combined with district heating;
Amendment 179 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 4
(4) 'cross-border legal body' means a legal body established under the laws of one of the participating countries in an Interreg programme provided that it is set up by territorial authorities or other bodies from at least two participating countries or Euroregions.
Amendment 515 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The contribution from the ERDF or, where applicable, an external financing instrument of the Union, to a small project fund within an Interreg programme shall not exceed EUR 20 000 000 or 1520% of the total allocation of the Interreg programme, whichever is lower.
Amendment 527 #
2018/0199(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 2
Article 24 – paragraph 2
2. The beneficiary of a small project fund shall be a cross-border legal body, a Euroregion or an EGTC.
Amendment 246 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv a (new)
(iv a) enhancing digital connectivity;
Amendment 305 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point vii a (new)
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point b – point vii a (new)
(vii a) promoting sustainable multimodal urban mobility;
Amendment 319 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c – point i
Amendment 332 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iv
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iv
Amendment 606 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point e
Amendment 620 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point f
Amendment 625 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point g
Amendment 635 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point h
Amendment 646 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point i
Amendment 661 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j – point i
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j – point i
Amendment 666 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j – point ii
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point j – point ii
Amendment 694 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 1
1. The ERDF shall support integrated territorial development based on territorial strategies in accordance with Article [23] of Regulation (EU) 2018/xxxx [new CPR] focused on functional urban areas taking into account the need to promote partnership within the metropolitan areas and to support urban-rural linkages ('sustainable urban development'), within programmes under both goals referred to in Article 4(2) of that Regulation.
Amendment 713 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 9 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
At least 610% of the ERDF resources at national level under the Investment for jobs and growth goal, other than for technical assistance, shall be allocated to sustainable urban development in the form of community-led local development, integrated territorial investments or another territorial tool under PO5.
Amendment 733 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point a
(a) support of capacity-building at subnational level;
Amendment 741 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 10 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) support of knowledge, territorial impact assessment, policy development and communication.
Amendment 770 #
2018/0197(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12 a (new)
Article 12 a Areas with natural or demographic handicaps In operational programmes co- financed by the ERDF, covering areas with severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps as referred to in Art.174 TFEU, particular attention shall be paid to addressing the specific difficulties of those areas.
Amendment 1107 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
Article 22 – paragraph 1 – point c
(c) another territorial tool supporting initiatives designed by the Member State for investments programmed for the ERDF under the policy objective referred in Article 4(1)(e).
Amendment 2160 #
2018/0196(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex IV – Policy objective 2 – row 3 – column 4
Annex IV – Policy objective 2 – row 3 – column 4
Amendment 142 #
2018/0166R(APP)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17 a. Expects ceilings for commitments and payments to be set so as to reflect the requested amounts and appropriate implementation profiles per programme, while providing for sufficient margins to adjust to future needs; considers, furthermore, that the overall payment ceiling must take into account the unprecedented weight of outstanding commitments at the end of 2020 that will need to be settled under the next MFF, whose estimate is constantly growing due to major implementation delays;
Amendment 220 #
2018/0166R(APP)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 2 a (new)
Recital 2 a (new)
(2a) The level of ceilings should be set on the basis of the amounts necessary for the financing and running of the Union programmes and policies as well as the required margins to be left available for adjustments to future needs. Furthermore, the ceilings for payments should account for the large amount of outstanding commitments expected at the end of 2020. The amounts set in this Regulation as well as in the basic acts for 2021-2027 programmes should be agreed in 2018 prices and, for the sake of simplification and predictability, adjusted on the basis of a fixed deflator of 2 % per year.
Amendment 278 #
2018/0166R(APP)
Part 2
Section A – point 14 a (new)
14a. In order to facilitate the adoption of a new MFF or a revision thereof, and to give effect to Article 312(5) TFEU, the institutions shall enter into regular meetings, namely: - Meetings of the Presidents as set out in Article 324 of the Treaty; - Briefings and debriefings of a delegation of the European Parliament by the Council presidency before and after relevant Council meetings; - Informal trilateral meetings in the course of the Council proceedings aimed at taking account of Parliament’s views in any document produced by the Council presidency; - Trilogues once both Parliament and the Council are provided with negotiating mandates; - Mutual appearance by the Council presidency in the relevant parliamentary committee and of Parliament’s negotiating team in the relevant Council formation. Parliament and the Council will transmit to each other as soon as available any document formally adopted in their respective preparatory bodies or formally submitted on their behalf.
Amendment 287 #
2018/0166R(APP)
Annex
Part C – point 8
8. In the interest of loyal and sound institutional cooperation, the European Parliament and the Council commit to maintaining regular and active contacts at all levels, through their respective negotiators, throughout the whole budgetary procedure and, in particular, during the conciliation period. The European Parliament and the Council undertake to ensure the timely and constant mutual exchange of relevant information and documents at both formal and informal levels, in particular by transmitting to each other all procedural documents adopted within their respective preparatory bodies as soon as available. They undertake as well as to hold technical or informal meetings as needed, during the conciliation period, in cooperation with the Commission. The Commission shall ensure timely and equal access to information and documents for the European Parliament and the Council.
Amendment 289 #
2018/0166R(APP)
Annex
Part E – point 21 a (new)
21a. In order to make full use of the 21- day conciliation period set out by the Treaty and allow the institutions to update their respective negotiating positions, the European Parliament and the Council undertake to examine the state-of-play of the conciliation procedure at every meeting of their relevant preparatory bodies throughout that period, and shall refrain from leaving it to its last stages.
Amendment 1 #
2017/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
– having regard to the Pact of Amsterdam establishing the Urban Agenda for the EU, agreed at the Informal Meeting of EU Ministers Responsible for Urban Matters on 30 May 2016 in Amsterdam,
Amendment 36 #
2017/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph –1 d (new)
Paragraph –1 d (new)
-1d. Notes that both cohesion policy and Horizon 2020 are equally important and complementary in supporting research and innovation;
Amendment 37 #
2017/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph –1 e (new)
Paragraph –1 e (new)
-1e. Notes that cohesion policy played a substantial role in recovery of EU economy by mobilising economic activities during the crisis and therefore enabling all UE regions to meet difficult targets in all cross cutting policies;
Amendment 61 #
2017/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provides European added value by contributing to European public goods, to public and private investments and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities;
Amendment 80 #
2017/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notes that the implementation of cohesion policy in a region can generate spill-over benefits elsewhere in the EU due to the increased trade generated; points out, however, that these benefits vary considerably from one Member State to the other, depending in particular on geographic proximity and the structure of the Member States’ economies;
Amendment 82 #
2017/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 109 #
2017/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that the particular structural social and economic situation of the outermost regions justifies specific measures, in accordance with Article 349 TFEU, and stresses the need to improve the specific measures for these regions by adjusting them whenever necessary; calls on the Commission to take the judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU of 15 December 2015 as the basis for ensuring that Article 349 TFEU is properly applied as regards the conditions governing access to the Structural Funds; suggests in particular extending the specific allocation for the outermost regions to the social component, maintaining the current level of Union co-financing in those regions, and better tailoring the thematic concentration;
Amendment 180 #
2017/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Paragraph 16 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Strongly opposes any attempt at separating European Social Fund from cohesion policy;
Amendment 194 #
2017/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Calls for ESI funds to be used to address demographic challenges (ageing, population loss and demographic pressure) which affect European regions in a variety of specific ways; stresses in particular the need to provide adequate support to the territories, such as some outermost regions, facing growing population pressure caused by a high birth rate and large-scale irregular migration;
Amendment 202 #
2017/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Stresses the potential of investments in culture, heritage, youth and sport to create jobs and growth and to improve social cohesion;
Amendment 203 #
2017/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Calls on the Commission and the Council to facilitate a timely start of the next programming period in order to prevent late payments and decommitments which hamper positive results of cohesion policy;
Amendment 214 #
2017/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP, which should remain the main indicator, for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the unemployment rate and the youth unemployment ratea complementary set of social, environmental and demographic indicators;
Amendment 261 #
2017/2279(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continuintensified, and acknowledges the importance of ex-ante conditionalities, which have proved their worth, but stresses that they have been a source of complexity and delays in the development and launching of programming; calls on the Commission to reduce the number of ex ante conditionalities and, in this field, to improve compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, making maximum use of existing strategic documents;
Amendment 146 #
2017/2054(INL)
Motion for a resolution
Annex – Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – table – row 21
Annex – Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – table – row 21
Poland 515
Amendment 137 #
2017/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 16
Subheading 16
Amendment 152 #
2017/2053(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53
Paragraph 53
Amendment 200 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 a (new)
Paragraph 32 a (new)
32a. Stresses that revising ceilings should remain an option in the MFF Regulation in the event of unforeseen circumstances, when the financing needs would exhaust or exceed available margins and special instruments; calls for the MFF Regulation to provide for a simplified procedure for a targeted revision under an agreed threshold;
Amendment 201 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 b (new)
Paragraph 32 b (new)
32b. Advocates in favour of maintaining the possibility to front- or backload the financing of any EU programme, in order to allow for countercyclical action that corresponds to the rhythm of the actual implementation as well as to provide a meaningful response to major crises; calls, moreover, for the legislative flexibility -currently enshrined in Point 17 of the Interinstitutional Agreement (IIA)- that allows for an adjustment in the overall envelope of programmes adopted by the ordinary legislative procedure of up to +/- 10 %, to be further increased to +/-15 %;
Amendment 202 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 32 c (new)
Paragraph 32 c (new)
32c. Points to the flexibility that can be achieved through transfers within the same MFF heading, with the aim of placing the financial resources exactly where they are needed and ensuring a better implementation of the EU budget; considers that a lower number of headings contributes to enhanced flexibility in the MFF; requests, however, the Commission to proactively inform and consult the budgetary authority when adopting significant autonomous transfers;
Amendment 225 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Considers that the Contingency Margin should be maintained as an instrument of last resort; stresses that this is a special instrument that can also be mobilised for payment appropriations only, and that its mobilisation was instrumental in responding to the 2014 payment crisis; calls, therefore, for an upward adjustment of its maximum annual allocation to 0.05 % of EU GNI; considers, however, that no compulsory offsetting for it being mobilised should apply;
Amendment 228 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41 a (new)
Paragraph 41 a (new)
41a. Notes that the current IIA foresees a special majority in Parliament for the mobilisation of three MFF special instruments; considers this provision to be obsolete, reflecting the special majorities needed for the adoption of the EU budget before the Lisbon Treaty; calls for a homogeneous approach as regards the voting requirements for the mobilisation of these instruments, which should be the same as for the adoption of the EU budget;
Amendment 683 #
2017/2052(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 101 a (new)
Paragraph 101 a (new)
101a. Considers that the unanimity requirement for the adoption of the MFF Regulation represents a true impediment in the process; calls, in that regard, on the European Council to activate the passerelle in Article 312(2)TFEU so as to allow for the adoption of the MFF Regulation by qualified majority; recalls, moreover, that the general passerelle clause of Article48(7) TEU can also be deployed, in order to apply the ordinary legislative procedure; stresses that a shift towards qualified majority voting for the adoption of the MFF Regulation would be in line with the decision-making process for the adoption of virtually all EU multiannual programmes, as well as for the annual procedure for adopting the EU budget;
Amendment 40 #
2017/2037(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Welcomes the establishment by the Commission of the Urban Data Platform; calls however on the Eurostat and the Commission to gather and compile more detailed data, and flow data in particular, in order to efficiently adjust the existing policies and shape the future ones;
Amendment 67 #
2017/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 99 #
2017/2006(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. 15a (new).Calls on various partnerships working on issues related to climate mitigation in the framework of Urban Agenda for the EU to swiftly adopt and present their actions plans; furthermore, calls on the Commission to take into consideration proposals contained therein, specifically in reference to better regulation, funding and knowledge in the future legislative proposals.
Amendment 16 #
2016/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Encourages the Commission to reflect on different indicators beyond the GDP that would allow for a just distribution of funds under cohesion policy in order to respond to new types of inequalities between EU regions that are arising and going beyond the economic development;
Amendment 18 #
2016/2326(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Paragraph 3 b (new)
Amendment 57 #
2016/2326(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the first signs of the accelerated implementation of the operational programmes observed during the year 2016; urges the Commission to identify the causes of the delays in implementation to avoid similar problems at the beginning of the next programming period and strongly encourages all actors involved to continue to speed up their activities;
Amendment 68 #
2016/2326(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Stresses that although cohesion policy has mitigated the impact of the crisisrecent economic and financial crisis in the EU, regional disparities and social inequalities remain high; calls for continuous action to reduce existing disparities, particularly in less developed regions, while maintaining support for transition and for more developed and to prevent the development of new disparities in all types of regions, so as to facilitate ownership of the policy in all regthe whole Unions;
Amendment 94 #
2016/2326(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic objectivesconcentration and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as an unallocated reserve or a simplification of re-programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region;
Amendment 118 #
2016/2326(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 184 #
2016/2326(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls on the Commission to ensure better synergies between the ESI Funds and other Union funds and programmes and to facilitate the implementation of multi-fund operations; warnconsiders that the EFSI should not undermine the strategic coherence and long-term perspective of cohesion policy programming and insists on the additionality of its resourcesharmonization of rules applicable to multi-fund operations and a clear presentation of different funding possibilities at the European level is crucial to ensure the best possible use of scarce financial resources; encourages the Commission to develop a toolbox for beneficiaries in this context;
Amendment 212 #
2016/2326(INI)
15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of alternative indicators to the GDP indicator, which remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such alternative indicators may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators basbelieves that the Social Progress Index or a demographic indicator should be considered oin social and employment aspectsthis context; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;
Amendment 219 #
2016/2326(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Encourages the Commission to consider the possibility of using NUTS III level as classification of regions in cohesion policy for some selected priorities;
Amendment 227 #
2016/2326(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Suggests an increased use of ESI Funds in order to tackle demographic change and address its regional and local consequences; notes the increasing importance of the Territorial Agenda and of successful rural-urban partnerships, as well as the exemplary role of smart cities as microcosms and catalysts for innovative solutions for regional and local challenges;
Amendment 235 #
2016/2326(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Notes the increasing importance of the Territorial Agenda and of successful rural-urban partnerships, as well as the exemplary role of smart cities as microcosms and catalysts for innovative solutions for regional and local challenges;
Amendment 240 #
2016/2326(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Welcomes the Pact of Amsterdam and the better recognition accorded to the role of cities and urban areas in European policy-making and demands an effective implementation of the partnerships and cooperative working methods that the Pact entails through the partnerships that the Pact entails; expects the results to be incorporated in future EU policies post- 2020;
Amendment 242 #
2016/2326(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Underlines the enhanced urban dimension of cohesion policy in the form of specific provisions for sustainable urban development and the urban innovative actions, and considers that it should be further developed in the future; encourages the Commission to strengthen the direct support to local governments under cohesion policy by enhancing financing and providing tailored instruments for territorial development;
Amendment 269 #
2016/2326(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls for the fostering of economic, social and territorial cohesion and solidarity across the EU to be put at the top of the EU agenda, and to maintain the fight against poverty and social exclusion, as well as against discrimination; considers that, apart from the goals enshrined in the Treaties, cohesion policy should continue serving as a tool to attain EU political objectives and remain the Union main investment policy available to all regions;
Amendment 298 #
2016/2326(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Is convinced of the need for an adequate budget for cohesion policy after 2020 which takes into account the complex internal and external challenges that the policy will have to address; calls for the share of cohesion policy in the total EU budget to be maintained in the future;
Amendment 300 #
2016/2326(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25a. Underlines the multi-annual nature of cohesion policy and calls to maintain its 7-year programming period or to introduce a 5+5 years programming period with an obligatory mid-term revision;
Amendment 143 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Strongly supports regional policy as one of the main investment instruments of the EU budget that enables economic, social and territorial cohesion; underlines that this policy generates growth and jobs in all Member States; is concerned, however, about the unacceptable delays in implementation of operational programmes at EU levelunder the current MFF; calls on the Commission andto identify the causes of the delays and on the Member States to cooperate in order to tackle them, in particular to ensure that the designation of managing, auditing and certifying authorities is concluded and implementation accelerates;
Amendment 241 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Underlines that, despite a final agreement on the MFF mid-term revision having not yet been reached, several positive elements of the revision that are currently under negotiation – notably in terms of increased flexibility – might prove to be instrumental in preventing and responding to a future payment crisis; believes that, if the implementation of cohesion policy were to accelerate as anticipated, the increased flexibility might be needed already next year in order to assure an adequate level of payment appropriations in the EU budget in response to that, and to avoid the accumulation of unpaid bills under cohesion policy at the end of the year;
Amendment 244 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Reiterates its longstanding position that the payments of special instruments (the Flexibility Instrument, the EU Solidarity Fund, the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund and the Emergency Aid Reserve) must be counted over and above the MFF payment ceiling, as is the case for commitments; underlines, in the context of the ongoing MFF mid- term revision, the potential progress achieved on the issue of budgeting the payments of the MFF special instruments with the revision of the 2014 Contingency Margin decision, even if this matter was not unequivocally resolved;
Amendment 248 #
2016/2323(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Underlines that according to the MFF regulation the Commission will put forward by the end of 2017 its proposals for the post-2020 MFF; attaches the utmost importance to the process leading up to the establishment of the new financial framework, and expects this to be commensurate to the challenges the Union is facing; calls for a swift conclusion to the ongoing MFF mid-term revision that should provide the necessary adjustment of the current financial framework and assure some additional flexibility of EU budget that is indispensable for attaining the European Union objectives;
Amendment 18 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Stresses that 5G network deployment will depend on EU-wide contributions, with coherent and timely actions at the Member States, regions and cities level and should encourage and incentivise a long-term cross-sector innovation and economic industry-wide cooperative framework;
Amendment 30 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Calls on the Commission to ensure that Member States, local and regional authorities and other partners are able to engage with the complex range of grants, financial instruments and public-private partnerships that are available for connectivity projects; acknowledges the establishment of the Broadband Fund but urges the EIB and the Commission to focus efforts on improving existing programmes that support the IT sector, such as Horizon 2020, rather than creating new ones;
Amendment 50 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that the ambitious goals published by the Commission in September 2016 will not be achieved without empowering Member States, national regulatory authorities and local and regional government; is deeply concerned that the opinion of the Body of European Regulators for Electronic Communications (BEREC) on the new electronic communications framework highlights the potential for increased EU-level interference, additional bureaucracy and an undermining of its independence;
Amendment 67 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Welcomes the European Commission Initiative to establish the Participatory Broadband Platform to ensure high level engagement of public and private entities, as well as local and regional authorities;
Amendment 71 #
2016/2305(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5 b. Recommends the Commission to establish an annual progress review and recommendations reporting on the 5G Action Plan and informs the European Parliament of the results;
Amendment 2 #
2016/2302(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Emphasises that the ultimate purpose of financial instruments (FIs) is to act in situations of market failure or suboptimal investment as a catalyst making it possible to mobilise funding for projects which cannot secure adequate support from the market; insistprovide a complementary way of financial support from the EU budget as compared to subsidies and grants with the aim of addressing one or more policy objectives of the Union; notes that in the funding channelled through2014-2020 programming period the EU-FI supported FIs should play a social role and not b under cohesion policy can be provided for all thematic objectives and all ESI Funds which constitutes an extension of the elimited to satisfying private interests onlygibility compared to the previous financial perspective; notes furthermore that the support can take form of tailor- made or off-the-shelf instruments;
Amendment 23 #
2016/2302(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Is alarmed by the significant delays in the implementation of the programmes; urgescohesion policy operational programmes under the current financial perspective; urges the Commission to identify the causes of the delays and the Member States to tackle them promptly all causes of delay, particularly late designation of manag, particularly when it comes to the designation of managing, certifying and auditing authorities,; in order to avoids seriously concerned about the strong possibility of a repetition of the accumulated backlog of unpaid invoices in the second half of the current MFF, which could seriously impact other EU-funded policies as well;
Amendment 40 #
2016/2302(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. In view of preparing the proposal for the next MFF, encourages the Commission to conduct an in-depth analysis of the use of the financial instruments since the beginning of the current programming period; stresses that when assessing a financial instrument, the leverage dimension cannot be the only evaluation criteria; is of the firm opinion that the possibility of a combination of various EU resources under harmonised management rules would help optimise the synergies between available sources of financing at EU level; encourages the Commission to reflect on a proper balance between the grants and FI in the next financial perspective and underlines that increasing use of financial instruments should not lead to a reduction in the Union budget;
Amendment 1 #
2016/2148(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Is concerned by delays in the adoption of operational programmes and the designation of managing, paying and certifying authorities aund calls for sufficient payment appropriations to be made available through the current multiannual financial framework (MFF) in orer cohesion policy that led to a slow start-up of the projects and an extremely low level of absorption of cohesion policy in the first three years of the current programming period; considers that the utmost effort needs to be mader to prevent a new backlog of unpaid biensure that the new programmes start without delay in the beginning of each programming period and calls, in the second halfis context, for a timely agreement ofn the next multiannual financial framework (MFF);
Amendment 4 #
2016/2148(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Underlines the high risk of the accumulation of payment claims under Heading 1b in the second half of the current MFF and calls for a sufficient level of payment appropriations to be made available on a yearly basis until the end of the current perspective in order to prevent a new backlog of unpaid bills; stresses, for this purpose, the need for the three EU institutions to develop and agree upon a new joint payment plan for 2016- 2020, which should provide for a clear strategy to meet all payment needs until the end of the current MFF;
Amendment 6 #
2016/2148(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the efforts made to usecontribution of the ESI Funds in support of key priorities set ining the implementation of the country-specific recommendations; notes the Commission’s proposal on the establishment of the Structural Reform Support Programme; stresses that Article 23 of the Common Provision Regulation must only be used as a last resort and that Parliament must be fully involved from the early stages; notes in this context the Commission's proposal on the establishment of the Structural Reform Support Programme that will be partly financed through the transfer of technical assistance funding under cohesion policy to the Programme;
Amendment 15 #
2016/2148(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that there is aUnderlines the stronger focus on performance of ESI Funds in the current MFF; believes that any link between performance and the ESI Funds in the future MFF can only bthe future performance framework in the next perspective should build on the restablished after aults of the thorough evaluation of the functioning of the current arrangement;
Amendment 20 #
2016/2148(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that, in the current MFF, financial instruments play a stronger rolen increased role as a complementary form of funding as compared to subsidies and grants; believes, however, that they should not substitute grants as the core tool for ESI Funds; stresses that their implementation must be effective, transparent and always subject to full parliamentary scrutiny, without any prejudice to the unity of the EU budget;
Amendment 30 #
2016/2148(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that the adequate response to the migration crisis has become a structural phenomenon in Europe and calls for further use to be made of ESI Funds in order to promote the integration of asylum seekers and refugees into societyone of the main challenges for Europe; underlines the possible role of ESI Funds in this context, especially bearing in mind the scarce financial resources in the EU budget in general; encourages the member states to use the cohesion policy funding to promote the integration of asylum seekers and refugees into society; calls on the Commission to enable a swift change of operational programmes for this purpose if needed;
Amendment 40 #
2016/2148(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to keep the budgetary authority informed about the possible budgetary consequences of Brexit for the ESI Funds in the EU-27 in the current programming period.
Amendment 216 #
2016/2148(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Welcomes the code of conduct agreed during the negotiations, which outlines the minimum standards for a well- functioning partnership; observes, however, that while the code has improved the implementation of the partnership principle in most Member States, many Member States have centralised large parts of the negotiation and implementation of the PAs and OPs; therefore, calls to guarantee in the future a real involvement of local and regional authorities in the negotiation and implementation process in respect of countries specific structures;
Amendment 46 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. RestoresCompensates in full all cuts related to the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) in the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) and Horizon 2020 for a total of EUR 1 240 million in commitments via new appropriations to be obtained through the mid-term revision of the MFF; increasesfor 2017; increases, moreover, the Youth Employment Initiative with additional EUR 1 500 million in commitment appropriations to provide an effective response to youth unemployment, which should also be financed by additional funds provided in; considers that the appropriate additional financing for these important Union programmes should be decided in the framework of the mid-term revision of the MFF;
Amendment 58 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Delivering on the commitment taken in June 2015 to minimise to the maximum the budgetary impact of the creation of the EFSI on Horizon 2020 and CEF in the framework of the annual budgetary procedure, decides to fully restore the original pre-EFSI profile of the Horizon 2020 and CEF lines that were cut for the provisioning of the EFSI Guarantee Fund; demands the corresponding additional commitments appropriations of EUR 1,24 billion above DB to be made availableexpects an overall agreement on this pressing matter to be reached in the framework of the MFFMFF mid-term revision;
Amendment 82 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Recalls that the Commission has not proposed any commitment appropriations for the Youth Employment Initiative in 2017 as a result of its frontloading in the years 2014-2015; decides, in line with the Regulation on the European Social Fund7 which foresees the possibility of such a continuation, to increase the Youth Employment Initiative with additional EUR 1 500 million in commitment appropriations and EUR 500 million in payment appropriations to provide an effective response to youth unemployment; notes that, in line with Parliament’s requests, these new appropriations should be financed by the use of all financial means available under the current MFF Regulation and through thean overall agreement on the appropriate additional financing of YEI for the remainder of this programming period should be reached in the context of the upcoming MFF mid- term revision; urges the Member States to do their utmost to speed up the implementation of the Initiative on the ground, for the direct benefit of young Europeans; __________________ 7 Regulation (EU) No 1304/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the European Social Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1081/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 470).
Amendment 97 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Underlines that Parliament continues to put the current migration challenge at the top of its agenda; welcomes the Commission’'s proposal for an additional EUR 1,8 billion to tackle the migration crisis in the Union, above what had initially been programmed for 2017; notes that the big deviation of the original programming shows the need of a full revision of the current MFF; is disappointed that the Commission did not use the opportunity to adjust the ceilings accordingly, particularly of Headadvocates in favour of an upwards adjustment of the Heading 3 ceiling 3s; stresses that the Commission proposes to finance this reinforcement largely through the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument (for EUR 530 million, thereby fully exhausting the funding available for this year) and the Contingency Margin (for EUR 1 160 million); given the unprecedented level of funding for migration-related expenditure (totalling EUR 5,2 billion in 2017) and the proposals for applying flexibility on the table, does not request further reinforcements for migration-related policies; at the same time, will resist any attempts to reduce funding for Union actions in this field;
Amendment 103 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Reiterates, that budgetary flexibility has its limits and can only be a short-term solution; is strongly convinced that a forward-looking and brave answer in the face of a crisis that involves the entire continent and shows no signs of abating, ispoints to an upwards adjustment of the ceiling of Heading 3; iconsistders that such an adjustment is indispensable and urgent and is disappointed that the Commission forewent the opportunity to propose it at the occasion of the MFF mid-term revisionall recent budgetary decisions to secure fresh appropriations in this field have actually led to a de facto revision of this ceiling;
Amendment 106 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
Amendment 130 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Notes that, in the light of the ongoing migration and refugee crisis, the Union’s external action is faced with ever growing funding needs which largely exceed the current size of Heading 4; therefore, underlines thatquestions whether the Heading 4 ceilings are vastly insufficient to provide for appropriate funding for the external dimension of the migration and refugee crisis; is disappointed that the Commission did not use the opportunity to adjust the ceilings, particularly of Heading 4 accordingly; deplores, that in order to fund new initiatives such as the FRT, the Commission chose in its DB to cut other programmes such as the Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI) and the Instrument contributing to Stability and Peace (IcSP) which is against the principle that humanitarian distress must go in parallel with the development processes,; stresses that this should not come at the cost of policies in other areas; regrets also that appropriations for humanitarian aid and for the Mediterranean strand of the European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) are below those approved in the 2016 budget, despite their obvious relevance in tackling the large number of external challenges; disapproveplores, finally, the irresponsibleunjustified cuts made by the Council, in particular on DCI and support expenditure lines;
Amendment 167 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48
Paragraph 48
48. Recalls the importance of the Emergency Aid Reserve (EAR) in providing a rapid response to specific aid requirements for third countries for unforeseen events and its earlier call for a substantial increase in its financial envelope, as part of the revision of the MFF; notes that its very quick consumption in 2016, likely to use up all possibilities of carry-over, is an indication that this special instrument will be vastlyprove to be insufficient to address all additional needs in 2017; increases therefore its appropriations to reach an annual allocation of EUR 1 billion and expects the MFF Regulation to be adjusted accordingly, pending a decision on the annual allocation of the EAR to be taken in the context of the MFF mid-term revision;
Amendment 171 #
2016/2047(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 50
Paragraph 50
50. Voices concern over the severeimportant decrease in payments appropriations in the 2017 Draft Budget as compared with the 2016 budget; notes that this reveals implementation delays which are not only worrying for the delivery of Union policies but also entail the risk of rebuilding a backlog of unpaid bills at the end of the current programming period, unless a satisfactory agreement is foun; considers that this matter should be tackled as part of the MFF revision; regrets, furthermore, the Council’s cuts in payments, despite the comfortable margins available below the ceilings;
Amendment 37 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 60
Recital 60
Amendment 67 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 178
Recital 178
Amendment 72 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 184
Recital 184
(184) In adopting Regulation (EU) 2015/1017 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 June 2015 on the European Fund for Strategic Investments, the European Investment Advisory Hub and the European Investment Project Portal – the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) – it was desired to enable Member States to use ESI Funds to contribute to the financing of eligible projects that arin which the EIB itself, or through the EIF, is investing with the supported by of the EU guarantee covered by, provided that those projects comply with the eligibility criteria and the objectives and principles under the legal framework of the relevant instruments and of the EFSI. A specific provision should be introduced to set out the terms and conditions to allow for better interaction and complementarity that will facilitate the possibility to combine ESI funds with EIB financial products under the EFSI’s Union Guarantee.
Amendment 74 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 188
Recital 188
(188) In order to incentivise private investors to co-invest in public policy projects, the concept of differentiated treatment of investors, which allows under specific conditions that ESI Funds can take a subordinated position to a private investor and EIB financial products under the EFSI’s EU Guarantee, should be introduced. At the same time, the conditions for application of such a differentiated treatment when implementing ESI funds should be laid down.
Amendment 97 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 125
Article 125
Amendment 127 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Amendment 156 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point b – point ii
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 11 – point b – point ii
“When implementing the financial instrument, the bodies referred to in points (a)to (d) of the first subparagraph shall ensure compliancecomply with applicable law, including rules covering the ESI Funds, State aid, public procurement and relevant standards and applicable legislation on the prevention of money laundering, the fight against terrorism, tax fraud and tax evasion. Those bodies shall not make use of or engage in tax avoidance structures, in particular aggressive tax planning schemes or practices not complying with tax good governance criteria, as set out in EU legislation including Commission recommendations and communications or or any formal notice by the latter. They shall not be established and, in relation to the implementation of the financial operations shall not maintain business relations with entities incorporated in jurisdictions that do not co-operate with the Union in relation to the application of the internationally agreed tax standards on transparency and exchange of information. Those bodies may, under their responsibility, conclude agreements with financial intermediaries for the implementation of financial operations. They shall transpose requirements referred to in this paragraph in their contracts with the financial intermediaries selected to participate in the execution of financial operations under such agreements.”
Amendment 161 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 39a – paragraph 1
Article 39a – paragraph 1
1. Member States may use ESI Funds to provide a contribution to financial instruments referred to in point (c) of Article 38(1) provided it has the aim to attract additional private sector investment and continues to contribute to ESI Funds objectives and the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth.
Amendment 164 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 39a – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 39a – paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. When a Member State decides to provide such a contribution to financial instruments, the leverage and profitable effects of the financial instrument shall be in the territory of the respective Member State and its regions;
Amendment 168 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 39a – paragraph 2
Article 39a – paragraph 2
2. The contribution referred to in paragraph 1 shall not exceed 215 % of the total support provided to final recipients. In the less developed regions referred to in point (b) of Article 120(3), the financial contribution may exceed 215% where duly justified by the ex-ante assessment, but shall not exceed 530%. The total support referred to in this paragraph shall comprise the total amount of new loans and guaranteed loans as well as equity and quasi-equity investments provided to final recipients. The guaranteed loans referred to in this paragraph shall only be taken into account to the extent that ESI Funds resources are committed for guarantee contracts calculated on the basis of a prudent ex ante risk assessment covering a multiple amount of new loans.
Amendment 174 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 39a – paragraph 6
Article 39a – paragraph 6
6. When implementing financial instruments under point (c) of Article 38(1), the bodies referred to in paragraph 2 of this article shall ensure compliancecomply with applicable law, including rules covering the ESI Funds, State aid, public procurement and relevant standards and applicable legislation on the prevention of money laundering, the fight against terrorism, tax fraud and tax evasion. Those bodies shall not make use of or engage in tax avoidance structures, in particular aggressive tax planning schemes or practices not complying with tax good governance criteria as set out in EU legislation including Commission recommendations and communications or any formal notice by the latter. They shall not be established and, in relation to the implementation of the financial operations shall not maintain business relations with entities incorporated in jurisdictions that do not co- operate with the Union in relation to the application of the internationally agreed tax standards on transparency and exchange of information. Those bodies may, under their responsibility, conclude agreements with financial intermediaries for the implementation of financial operations. They shall transpose requirements referred to in this paragraph in their contracts with the financial intermediaries selected to participate in the execution of financial operations under such agreements.
Amendment 181 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 39a – paragraph 12
Article 39a – paragraph 12
12. In case of financial instruments referred to in point (c) of Article 38(1) which take the form of a guarantee instrument, Member States may decide that ESI Funds may contribute to junior and/or mezzanine tranches of portfolios of loans covered also under the EFSI’s Union guarantee. Leverage and returns resulting from such contributions shall be used in accordance with the objectives of the respective ESI Funds to support actions and final recipients consistent with the programme(s) from which such contributions are made.
Amendment 182 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 39a – paragraph 13
Article 39a – paragraph 13
13. For the ERDF, the ESF, the Cohesion Fund and the EMFF, a separate priority, and for the EAFRD, a separate type of operation, with a co-financing rate according to the determination of co- financing rates in article 120(3) with a drop down of up to 1005% may be established within a programme to support operations implemented through financial instruments referred to in point (c) of Article 38(1).
Amendment 183 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 13
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 39a – paragraph 14
Article 39a – paragraph 14
14. Notwithstanding Articles 70 and 93(1), contributions pursuant to paragraph 1 of this Article may be used for the purpose of giving rise to new debt and equity finance. Leverage and profitable effects thereof shall be in the entire territory of the respective Member State without regard to the categories of region, unless otherwise provided for in the funding agreementand its regions.
Amendment 205 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 43a – paragraph 1
Article 43a – paragraph 1
1. Support from the ESI Funds to financial instruments invested in final recipients and gains and other earnings or yields, such as interest, guarantee fees, dividends, capital gains or any other income generated by those investments, which are attributable to the support from the ESI Funds, may be used for differentiated treatment of private investors, as well as the EIB when using the EU guarantee pursuant to Regulation (EU) 2015/1017. Such differentiated treatment shall be justified by the need to attract private counterpart resources.
Amendment 214 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 17
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 43a – paragraph 3
Article 43a – paragraph 3
3. The differentiated treatment shall not exceed what is necessary to create the incentives for attracting private counterpart resources. It shall not over-compensate private investors and the EIB when using the EU guarantee according to Regulation (EU) 2015/1017. The alignment of interest shall be ensured through an appropriate sharing of risk and profit.
Amendment 224 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point a a (new)
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 22 – point a a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – point f
Article 58 – paragraph 1 – point f
Amendment 225 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point a a (new)
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 23 – point a a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 59 – paragraph 1 b (new)
Article 59 – paragraph 1 b (new)
(aa) The following paragraph 1b is added: “1b. 0.25% of the money available for technical assistance shall be used to carry out communication activities to raise awareness and to inform citizens about the results and successes of projects supported by ESI Funds; such communication activities shall continue until 4 years after closure of the project when results of a project are clearly visible.”
Amendment 256 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 40 – point e a (new)
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 40 – point e a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 106 – subparagraph 1 – point 8 – point ca
Article 106 – subparagraph 1 – point 8 – point ca
(ea) the following point is added: (ca) the arrangements ensuring the dissemination of information and communication in relation to the joint action plan and to the Funds;
Amendment 259 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 47 – point a
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 47 – point a
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 119 – paragraph 1 –subparagraph 1
Article 119 – paragraph 1 –subparagraph 1
The amount of the Funds allocated to technical assistance shall be limited to 4 % of the total amount of the Funds allocated to operational programmes at the time of the adoption of the operational programmes in a Member State of the Investment for jobs and growth goal. 0.25% thereof shall be used for information and communication activities as defined in article 59;
Amendment 267 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 60
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 60
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Article 152 – paragraph 3a
Article 152 – paragraph 3a
“Where a call for proposal is launched prior to the entry into force of Regulation XXX/YYY amending the present Regulation the managing authority (or monitoring committee for the programmes under the European territorial cooperation goal) may decide not to apply the obligation set out in Article 67(2a) for a maximum of 612 months starting from the date of entry into force of Regulation XXX/YYY. Where the document setting out the conditions for support is provided to the beneficiary within a period of 6 12 months starting from the date of entry into force of Regulation XXX/YYY the managing authority may decide not to apply those amended provisions.”
Amendment 272 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 61 a (new)
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 61 a (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Annexe XII – subsection 2.2 – point 4
Annexe XII – subsection 2.2 – point 4
61a. In subsection 2.2 point 4 is replaced by the following: “4. During implementation of an ERDF or Cohesion Fund operation, the beneficiary shall put up, at a location readily visible to the public, a temporary billboard of a significant size for each operation consisting of the financing of infrastructure or construction operations for which the total public support to the operation exceeds EUR 500 000.;”
Amendment 273 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 61 b (new)
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 61 b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Annexe XII – subsection 2.2 – point 5 – introductory part
Annexe XII – subsection 2.2 – point 5 – introductory part
61b. In subsection 2.2. point 5 the introductory part is replaced by the following: “5. No later than three months after completion of an operation, the beneficiary shall put up a permanent plaque or billboard of significant size at a location readily visible to the public ofor each operation that fulfils the following criteriaon:
Amendment 274 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 61 b (new)
Article 265 – paragraph 1 – point 61 b (new)
Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013
Annexe XII – subsection 2.2 – point 5 – point a
Annexe XII – subsection 2.2 – point 5 – point a
Amendment 536 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 125
Article 125
Amendment 558 #
2016/0282(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 151 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
Article 151 – paragraph 2 – point b a (new)
(ba) faith-based organisations;
Amendment 46 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) In accordance with Article 80 of the Treaty, Union acts should, whenever necessary, contain appropriate measures to give effect to the principle of solidarity. A voluntary corrective allocation mechanism should be established in order to ensure a fair sharing of responsibility between Member States and a swift access of applicants to procedures for granting international protection in situations when a Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is responsible under this Regulation.
Amendment 49 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 32
Recital 32
(32) A key based on the size of the population and of the economy of the Member States should be applied as a point of reference in the operation of the corrective allocation mechanism in conjunction with a threshold, so as to enable the mechanism to function as a means of assisting Member States under disproportionate pressure. The application of the corrective allocation for the benefit of a Member State should be triggered automatically where the number of applications for international protection for which a Member State is responsible exceeds 150% of the figure identified in the reference key. In order to comprehensively reflect the efforts of each Member State, the number of persons effectively resettled to that Member State should be added to the number of applications for international protection for the purposes of this calculation.
Amendment 54 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35
Recital 35
(35) A Member State of allocation may decide not to accept the allocated applicants during a twelve months-period, in which case it should enter this information in the automated system and notify the other Member States, the Commission and the European Union Agency for Asylum. Thereafter the applicants that would have been allocated to that Member State should be allocated to the other Member States instead. The Member State which temporarily does not take part in the corrective allocation should make a solidarity contribution of EUR 250,000 per applicant not accepted to the Member State that was determined as responsible for examining those applications. The Commission should lay down the practical modalities for the implementation of the solidarity contribution mechanism in an implementing act. The European Union Agency for Asylum will monitor and report to the Commission on a yearly basis on the application of the financial solidarity mechanism.
Amendment 387 #
2016/0133(COD)
1. The allocation mechanism referred to in this Chapter shall be applied voluntarily for the benefit of a Member State, where that Member State is confronted with a disproportionate number of applications for international protection for which it is the Member State responsible under this Regulation.
Amendment 410 #
Amendment 415 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 3
Article 37 – paragraph 3
Amendment 417 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 4
Article 37 – paragraph 4
Amendment 421 #
2016/0133(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 37 – paragraph 5
Article 37 – paragraph 5
Amendment 26 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Stresses that Article 17 of the MFF Regulation provides for the possibility of revising the MFF in the event of unforeseen circumstances; points to the magnitude of the crises that have affected the Union since the adoption of the current MFF in 2013;
Amendment 216 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Expects, therefore, that new reinforcements in commitment appropriations will be accompanied by a corresponding increase in payment appropriations, including an upward revision of the annual payments ceiling if necessary; considers, moreover, that the mid-term review/revision of the MFF provides an excellent opportunity to take stock of payment implementation and updated forecasts for the expected evolution of payments up to the end of the current MFF; believes that a joint payment plan for 2016-2020 should be developed and agreed between the three institutions; insists that such a new payment plan should be based on sound financial management and provide for a clear strategy to meet all payment needs in all headings until the end of the current MFF, and to avoid a "hidden backlog" caused by an artificial slowdown in the implementation of certain multiannual programmes and other mitigating measures such as the reduction of pre- financing rates;
Amendment 229 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Strongly believes that the automatic transfer to the following years of any surplus resulting from under- implementation of the EU budget or fines imposed on companies for breaching EU competition law would contribute to easing the payment problem; stresses that this surplus should be budgeted as extra revenue in the EU budget, with no corresponding adjustment of the GNI contributions; considers that this measure would significantly contribute to easing the payment problem of the EU budget; calls on the Commission to make appropriate legislative proposals in this regard;
Amendment 234 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Believes, therefore, that the mid- term revision of the MFF Regulation should provide for the lifting of a number of constraints and limitations that were imposed by the Council on the flexibility provisions at the time of adoption of the MFF; considers, in particular, that any restrictions on the carry-over of unused appropriations and margins, either by setting annual ceilings (Global Margin for Payments) or by imposing time-limits (Global Margin for Commitments) should be revoked; believes that, given the current budgetary constraints across several headings, no specific scope should be defined as regards the utilisation of resources under the Global Margin for Commitments;
Amendment 258 #
2015/2353(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43
Paragraph 43
43. Believes that the mid-term review/revision provides for an excellent opportunity for the first-time assessment of the functioning of the EU policies and programmes concerned, as well as the operation of the MFF flexibility provisions and special instruments, and expects the Commission to supply an analysis identifying the shortcomings of the current implementation system; pays particular attention to the assessment of the impact on the implementation process of the new elements introduces in the current programming period, such as ex- ante conditionalities under cohesion policy; invites the Commission to come up with concrete proposals to address the possible deficiencies and to improve the implementation environment for the remaining years of the current MFF, in order to ensure the best possible use of scarce financial resources;
Amendment 56 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas contrary to the budgetary arrangements in all otherfederations and understanding that the EU is not a federations per se, the EU budget, is dependent on contributions from Member State level to EU level;
Amendment 101 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)
Recital G a (new)
Ga. whereas some Member States dramatically lack the willingness to implement the Country Specific Recommendations, given on the yearly basis by the Commission, and, hence, undermine the economic growth that the EU currently strives for;
Amendment 580 #
2015/2344(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Considers that a financial instrument is needed to work as an incentive-based mechanism for convergence and sustainable structural reforms with clear conditionality; believes that the Structural Reform Support Programme (SRSP) proposed by the Commission, which is designed to provide technical support to national authorities in all member states for measures aimed at reforming institutions, governance, administration, and economic and social sectors with a view to enhancing growth and jobs, can be further developed asould possibly provide a contribution to this function of the fiscal capacity;
Amendment 4 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes with concernConsiders alarming the decrease of payment appropriations under heading 1b to EUR 49 billion (-4% as compared to 2015), and questions with concern whether the amounts proposed in the Draft Budget (DB) 2016 for heading 1b are indeed sufficient to face the current unprecedented level of payments needed under this heading;
Amendment 119 #
2015/2132(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 94 a (new)
Paragraph 94 a (new)
94a. Underlines that, barely two years after the beginning of the current MFF, the Commission had to request the mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument twice, as well as the deployment of the Contingency Margin, in order to cover pressing and unforeseen needs that could not possibly be financed within the existing MFF ceilings; also notes that the Global Margin for Commitments in 2015, the first year of its operation, was immediately utilised to its full extent while two important Union programmes needed to be reduced to allow for the financing of new initiatives; stresses that new commitments are no longer available in 2016 to finance key political Union objectives, like youth employment; clearly sees that the available flexibility mechanisms in the MFF have already been pushed to their limits, due to the tight MFF ceilings in most headings; considers that these developments make the case for a substantial MFF mid-term revision; eagerly anticipates the Commission proposals to that effect in the course of 2016;
Amendment 22 #
2015/2074(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notes the Commission's document "Elements for a payment plan to bring the EU budget back onto a sustainable track” presented at the Parliament on 16 April 2015; notes in particular that according to the estimation by the Commission the backlog of payments under heading 1b in relation to the 2007-2013 programing period could be reduced to 20 billion euro at the end of 2015 and to 2 billion euro at the end of 2016;
Amendment 26 #
2015/2074(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Underlines that the estimated reduction of the backlog will be only possible if sufficient level of payment appropriations is assured in the 2016 budget; calls on the Commission to reflect it in the draft budget 2016 to be shortly presented;
Amendment 27 #
2015/2074(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Demands that the payment plan to be agreed between Parliament, the Council and the Commission, in line with the joint statement of December 2014 of the Parliament and of the Council in the framework of the agreement reached on 2014 and 2015 budgets, be implemented without any further delay; calls, to this end, for sufficient payment appropriations to be provided under heading 1b within the 2016 budget, with a view to decreasing the level of the backlog as much as possible by the end of the year; underlines the urgency of addressing this issue in a proper way, as the situation of outstanding payments undermines the credibility, effectiveness and sustainability of the policy.
Amendment 116 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10
Recital 10
(10) Further to a dialogue with the requesting Member State, including in the context of the European Semester, the Commission should analyse the request, taking into account the principles of partnership, transparency, equal treatment and sound financial management and determine the support to be provided based on urgency, breadth and depth of the problems as identified, support needs in respect of the policy areas envisaged, analysis of socioeconomic indicators, and the general administrative capacity of the Member State. The Commission should also, in close cooperation with the Member State concerned, identify the priority areas, the scope of the support measures to be provided and the global financial contribution for such support, taking into account the existing actions and measures financed by Union funds or other Union programmes.
Amendment 232 #
2015/0263(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2
Article 7 – paragraph 2
2. Taking into account the principles of partnership, transparency, equal treatment and sound financial management, further to a dialogue with the Member State, including in the context of the European Semester, the Commission shall analyse the request for support referred to in paragraph 1 based on the urgency, breadth and depth of the problems identified, support needs in respect of the policy areas concerned, analysis of socioeconomic indicators and general administrative capacity of the Member State. Taking into account the existing actions and measures financed by Union funds or other Union programmes, the Commission in close cooperation with the Member State concerned shall identify the priority areas for support, the scope of the support measures to be provided and the global financial contribution for such support.
Amendment 218 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) Many small and medium enterprises, as well as mid-cap companies, across the Union require assistance to attract market financing, especially as regards investments that carry a greater degree of risk. The EFSI should help these businesses to overcome capital shortages and market failures by allowing the EIB and the European Investment Fund ('EIF') to provide direct and indirect equity injections, as well as to provide guarantees for high-quality securitisation of loans, and other products that are granted in pursuit of the aims of the EFSI.
Amendment 237 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) The EFSI should be established within the EIB in order to benefit from its experience and proven track record and in order for its operations to start to have a positive impact as quickly as possible. The work of the EFSI on providing financeprovision of EFSI funding to small and medium enterprises and small mid-cap companies shouldmay be channelled through the European Investment Fund ('EIF') to benefit from its experience in these activities.
Amendment 294 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15
Recital 15
(15) The EFSI should target projects with a higher risk-return profile than existing EIB and Union instruments to ensure additionality over existing operations. The EFSI should finance projects across the Union, including in the countries most affected by the financial crisis promoting geographical spread. The EFSI should only be used where financing is not available from other sources on reasonable terms.
Amendment 320 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)
Recital 16 a (new)
(16a) The selection method of investment projects should take into consideration different levels of development of national financial markets as well as their stability, which will have a direct impact on the ability to use the EFSI in Member States. This will secure the distribution of financial resources throughout the whole Union.
Amendment 336 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) Decisions on the use of the EFSI support for infrastructure and large mid- cap projects should be made by an Investment Committee. The Investment Committee should be composed of independent experts who are knowledgeable and experienced in the areas of investment projects, such as research and development, transport and SMEs, as well as geographic markets within the European Union. The Investment Committee should be accountable to a Steering Board of the EFSI, who should supervise the fulfilment of the EFSI's objectives. To effectively benefit from the experience of the EIF, the EFSI should support funding to the EIF to allow the EIF to undertake individual projects in the areas of small and medium enterprises and small mid-cap companies.
Amendment 387 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20 a (new)
Recital 20 a (new)
Amendment 395 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21
Recital 21
(21) Provided that all relevant eligibility criteria are fulfilled, Member States may use European Structural Investment Funds to contribute to the financing of eligible projects that are supported by the EU guarantee. The flexibility of this approach should maximise the potential to attract investors to the areas of investment targeted by the EFSI. The EFSI may also be used for co- financing projects eligible under European Structural and Investment Funds.
Amendment 495 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31
Recital 31
(31) Within the Union, there are a significant number of potentially viable projects that are not being financed due to a lack of certainty and transparency with respect to such projects. Often, this is because private investors are not aware of the projects or have insufficient information to make an assessment of the investment risks. The Commission and the EIB, with support from the Member States, should promote the creation of a transparent pipeline of current and future economically viable investment projects in the Union suitable for investment. This 'project pipeline' should ensure that information is made publicly available regarding investment projects on a regular and structured basis to ensure that investors have reliable information on which to base their investment decisions.
Amendment 612 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 a (new)
Article 1 a (new)
Article 1a Definitions For the purposes of this Regulation, the following definitions apply: "national promotional banks or institutions" mean legal entities carrying out financial activities on a professional basis which are conferred a mandate by a Member State, whether central, regional or local level, to carry out public development or promotional activities.
Amendment 682 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2
The EFSI Agreement shall provide that there is a clear distinction between operations carried out with the EFSI support and other operations of the EIB. Therefore, the EIB should ensure that EFSI activities are presented in a separate report.
Amendment 735 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3
Article 2 – paragraph 3
3. Member States that become parties to the EFSI Agreement shall be able to provide their contribution, in particular, in the form of cash or a guarantee acceptable to the EIB. Other third parties shall be able to provide their contribution only in cash. Financial contributions by Member States, including possible contributions to investment platforms, shall not be taken into account by the Commission when defining the fiscal adjustment under the preventive and corrective arm of the Stability and Growth Pact. In the event of an excess over the deficit reference value the Commission shall not launch an EDP if that excess is only due to the contribution and is small and expected to be temporary. Similarly, no procedure shall be launched when assessing and excess over the debt reference value in the event that this is due solely to contributions to the EFSI.
Amendment 742 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2 a (new)
Article 2a Eligibility criteria for the use of EU guarantee The EFSI shall target projects with generally a higher risk profile than existing normal EIB instruments so as to ensure additionality over existing operations. The EFSI shall support projects which: a) are consistent with Union policies and contribute to achieving the Union objectives, such as smart, sustainable and inclusive growth; b) could not have been carried out in that period under normal EIB instruments without EFSI support or to the same extent during that period under EIF and EU instruments, nor financed by the market on reasonable terms; c) are viable from an economic and technical perspective;
Amendment 751 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 1
1. The EFSI Agreement shall provide that the EFSI shall be governed by a Steering Board, which shall determine the strategic orientation, the strategic asset allocation and operating policies and procedures, including the investment policy of projects that EFSI can support, the treatment of investment platforms and the risk profile of the EFSI, in conformity with the objectives under Article 5(2). The Steering Board shall elect one of its members to be Chairperson. adopt investment guidelines for the use of the EU guarantee to be implemented by the Investment Committee. The investment guidelines shall be made publicly available.
Amendment 780 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 791 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Article 3 – paragraph 3
Amendment 859 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2
The Investment Committee shall be composed of sixeight independent experts and the Managing Director. Independent experts shall have a high level of relevant market experience in project finance and be appointed by the Steering Boardstructuring and project financing. The Investment Committee shall have an overall pluridisciplinary composition encompassing both a broad range of expertise in various sectors, such as research and development, transport and SMEs, and a wide knowledge of geographic markets within the Union. The Investment Committee shall be appointed by the Steering Board, after an open and transparent selection process, for a renewable fixed term of up to three years.
Amendment 981 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) expansion of renewable energy and energy and resource efficiencydevelopment and modernisation of the energy sector, including the development of indigenous energy sources;
Amendment 1070 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 4
Article 5 – paragraph 4
4. Provided that all relevant eligibility criteria are fulfilled, Member States may use European Structural and Investment Funds to contribute to the financing of eligible projects in which the EIB is investing with the support of the EU guarantee. The EFSI may also be used for co- financing projects eligible for European Structural and Investment Funds.
Amendment 1153 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2 b (new)
Article 8 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2 b (new)
In the context of the Mid-term review of the MFF 2014-2020, due to be launched by the end of 2016, the Council and the Parliament shall examine whether the redeployments from the EU programmes that were used as a source of financing for the guarantee fund could be compensated; the Council and the Parliament shall explore the ways of reinforcing these programmes by additional resources, to the largest possible extent.
Amendment 1183 #
2015/0009(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 a (new)
Article 8 a (new)
Amendment 4 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)
Citation 8 a (new)
- having regard to the Communication from the Commission of 10 July 2012, "Smart cities and communities - European innovation partnership", COM (2012) 4701,
Amendment 6 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)
Citation 11 a (new)
- having regard to the Commission's report "Cities of tomorrow. Challenges, visions, ways forward", October 2011,
Amendment 11 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas ‘functional urban areas’ in the EU are not limited only to big cities but also include a unique polycentric structure built around large, medium-sized and small towns and cities and peri-urban areas, thus going beyond the traditional administrative borders to encompass various territories linked by their economic, social, environmental and demographic challenges;
Amendment 33 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas some of the challenges which cities are facing can only be met by taking into account their relation toin partnership with their the surrounding rural areas;
Amendment 47 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) regulation (Regulation (EU) No 1301/2013) reinforces the urban dimension of the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) by allocating at least 5 % of its financial support to integrated actions for sustainable urban development, by giving urban authorities more responsibilities in selecting and managing projects through the delegation of management tasks to urban authorities, in particular giving them more responsibilities for tasks related at least to the selection of operations; by creating tools such as integrated territorial investments (ITIs), and community-led local development (CLLD) and ‘innovative actions’, by allocating a specific budget for ‘innovative actions’ in order to test new solutions in relation to sustainable urban development, and by establishing an urban development network;
Amendment 56 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Is of the opinion that EU policies should support and enable towns, cities and larger functional urban areas to attain their full strength and potential as motors of economic growth, employment and social inclusion; believes, therefore, that towns, cities and larger functional urban areas need to be more closely associated with the entire European policymaking cycle;
Amendment 72 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Supports the establishment of a European Urban AgendaWelcomes the initiative of the European Commission to work towards a European Urban Agenda; supports its establishment in order to anchor the urban dimension more efficiently in European and national policymaking and policy implementation, and thus improve the conditions for sustainable, economic and socially inclusive development of functional urban areas in Europe;
Amendment 75 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers that the European Urban Agenda should constitute a strategy addressing towns, cities and functional urban areas in the European Union, that in long term would develop into an urban policy at EU level;
Amendment 94 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the Commission to apply a more place-based integrated territorial approach when conceptualising new policy initiatives aimed at urban areas, in order to ensure consistency and to empower towns, cities and larger functional urban areas to deliver the Europe 2020 objectives of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth;
Amendment 103 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Asks the Commission to systematically introduce a territorial impact assessment on the urban dimension of all relevant EU policy initiatives and to make sure that all relevant sectorial EU policies adequately address the challenges that towns, cities and larger functional urban areas are facing; calls on the Commission to concentrate these territorial impact assessments on the following elements: balanced territorial development, territorial integration and territorial governance;
Amendment 113 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Recalls that EU structurregional policiesy and their financial instruments are better equipped as a rule to support complex integrated territorial strategies for functional areas through shared strategic planning and rules; encourages Member States to make full use of the available new instruments such as ITIs and CLLD, as well as of the new flexible operational programmes (OPs), in order to successfully support the implementation of integrated urban development plans;
Amendment 137 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Urges the Commission to develop a new model of multi-level governance based on partnership and learning from existing good practices, combining formal governmental structures with informal flexible governance structures that correspond to the new realities of the digitalised ‘'network’' society, and which is adapted to the scale at which the challenges exist, a model which improves multi-level cooperation, both vertical and horizontal, with governmental and non-governmental actors at local, regional, national and European level, thus bringing government closer to the citizens and improving the democratic legitimacy of the European project; recommends that this model become the working method of the future European Urban Agenda;
Amendment 150 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Believes that in order for the European Urban Agenda to be an effective tool it should be a shared and regularly updated conceptual framework with a thematic focus on a limited number of challenges in the larger context of the Europe 2020 goals of smart, inclusive and sustainable growth, with particular attention being given to social inclusion, demographic change and environmental sustainability;
Amendment 166 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Asks the Commission to appointdesignate a special EU urban envoy to monitor and evaluate the practical implementation ofbe responsible for such coordination by closely following the implementation of the Europe 2020 strategy and the territorial agenda of the EU in a horizontal (engaging all relevant policy sectors) and vertical (engaging all levels of government) manner; is of the opinion that the special EU urban envoy should, with the help of the Commission’s Inter-service Group on ‘Urban Development’, perform a systematic impact assessment of policy proposals, ensuring that the urban dimension of future legislation is adequately addressed;
Amendment 170 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Calls on the Commission to test the implementation of the European Urban Agenda in three selected thematic fields reflecting the challenges of urban areas ("urban pilot project"), in particular by ensuring the cross-sectorial coordination of different EU policies and removing existing overlaps, applying the multi-level governance model and conducting territorial impact assessments; asks the Commission to report to the European Parliament on the progress and results in this respect on a regular basis;
Amendment 171 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 b (new)
Paragraph 23 b (new)
23b. Encourages the Commission to develop while using the existing structures and e.g. as part of the "urban pilot project", single points of information in Member States on the urban dimension of EU policies (Urban One-Stop-Shops) with the aim to provide comprehensive information in particular on different EU initiatives, guidelines and financial possibilities in relation to urban development;
Amendment 177 #
2014/2213(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)
Paragraph 25 a (new)
25 a. Is of the opinion that well developed and established national urban policies are a prerequisite for an European Urban Agenda;
Amendment 2 #
2014/2181(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Notes that the implementation of the personalised services was finished at the end of 2013 and that according to the provisional data, 269 persons participated in 313 different activities in the framework of the package out of which 219 persons have found employment as a result of the provided support;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2181(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Notes that according to the provisional data, the total cost of the implementation of the personalised services was significantly lower than the estimated one due to the reduced number of workers who participated in the services;
Amendment 4 #
2014/2181(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)
Paragraph 9 c (new)
9c. Stresses that despite the lower than initially estimated number of workers participating in the actions, according to the provisional data, the number of unemployed workers covered by the package still registered in the Labour Office amounts to 85, which proves that the vast majority of the workers affected by the redundancies in Fiat Auto Poland have found employment;
Amendment 3 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that the Court of Auditors ('the Court') has concluded that regional policy remains one of the policy areas which is particularly error prone and that there is not much difference observed in 2013 as compared to 2012, as the most likely error rate for 2013 was set at 6,9 % (as compared to 6,8 % in 2012), which proves the stability of the system and the significant improvement in the 2007-2013 programming period as compared to the 2000-2006 programming period;
Amendment 7 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the Court detected serious errors in public procurement (39 % of estimated error rate), a high frequency of non-compliance with state aid rules (17 % of the estimated error rate), as well as extremely low rates of disbursement of financial engineering instruments to final recipients in 2013;
Amendment 10 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Draws attention to the different approach by the Commission and the Court to the calculation of error rate in relation to transactions to which the Commission applied flat-rate corrections and calls once again for the standardisation of the methodology; acknowledges the efforts of the Commission in this respect;
Amendment 26 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that 80 % of funding is administered under shared management at Member State level and that the Court found that for the majoritysome of errors identified there was sufficient information available for Member States to detect these errors themselves; points out, therefore, that measures such as improving administrative capacity onin relation to public procurement, eligibility rules and state aid, and focusing on simplification and on a risk-based approach should be implemented at Member State level;
Amendment 29 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Draws attention to the multiannuality of the cohesion policy management system and underlines that the final evaluation of irregularities related to the policy implementation will be possible only at the closure of the programming period;
Amendment 33 #
2014/2075(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the reinforced control and audit procedures foreseen in the regulatory framework for the 2014-2020 programming period, and in particular regarding the management verifications and controls before the certification to the Commission of programme annual accounts and the submission of management declarations by the managing authorities; notes that the Commission’s corrective capacity was further improved by removing, under certain conditions, the possibility for Member States to re-use funds, resulting in net financial corrections; welcomes the establishment of a Competence Centre on administrative capacity building to support public administrations managing ERDF and the Cohesion Fund; supports the enhanced result-orientation and thematic concentration of cohesion policy that should ensure high added value of the co- financed operations.
Amendment 1 #
2014/2036(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. ConsiderWelcomes the increase in payment appropriations for Heading 1b which is the main area affected by the shortage of payments in the Union budget in general; considers nevertheless that this is the bare minimum to cover the actual needs until the end of 2014 and will not be sufficient to solve the recurrent snowball effect of unpaid bills that has been expanding since the 2010 budget; recalls, in particular, that the bulk of invoices under heading 1b are traditionally submitted by Member States towards the end of each financial year in order to prevent possible de-commitments due to the application of N+2 and N+3 rules;
Amendment 3 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. Draws attention to the different approach by the Commission and the Court to the calculation of error rate in relation to transactions to which the Commission applied flat-rate corrections and calls for the standardisation of the methodology;
Amendment 5 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Draws attention to the multiannuality of the cohesion policy management system and underlines that the final evaluation of irregularities related to the policy implementation will be possible only at the closure of the programming period;
Amendment 7 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the new rules for the 2014- 2020 programming period, decided through the co-decision procedure, including measures such as the designations of audit and certifying authorities, accreditations of audit authorities, audit examination and acceptance of accounts, financial corrections and net financial corrections, proportional control, ex-ante conditionalities that aim to further contribute to the reduction of the level of error; welcomes also the definition of serious deficiency and the anticipated increased level of corrections for repeated deficiencies;
Amendment 9 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Welcomes the recent Communication of the Commission outlining the approach towards the application of net financial corrections in the areas of agriculture and cohesion policy in the next programming period; awaits the delegated act laying down detailed rules for the criteria for the assessment of the functioning of management and control systems, for establishing the level of financial corrections to be applied and for applying flat-rate corrections.
Amendment 33 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Heading 1
Heading 1
Agricultural and regional policy, subject to political reservation
Amendment 126 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Observes thatEncourages the Commission does notto continue conduct enoughing random sample audits of its own at national audit authorities and final beneficiaries;
Amendment 147 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Calls on the Commission, in its annual activity reports, to indicate how its own risk analyses have influenced the use of its own audit capacities, which countries were concerned and whether the shortcomings were remedied; calls for more direct audits of random samples taken from national granting authorities and final beneficiaries;
Amendment 154 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
Amendment 303 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 152
Paragraph 152
152. Welcomes the fact that the new ERDFCommon Provisions Regulation108 introduces a series of improvements: payment of the first instalment only after adoption of the operational programme; decommitment three years after expiry of the programme (‘n+3’); reduction of advance payments; 10% of the calculated amount of invoices is withheld from payments until the final statement has been approved; country- specific recommendations may be included in partnership agreements; __________________ 108 Regulation (EU) No 1301/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on the European Regional Development Fund and on specific provisions concerning the Investment for growth and jobs goal and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1080/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 289).
Amendment 304 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 152
Paragraph 152
152. Welcomes the fact that the new ERDF Regulation108 introduces a series of improvements: payment of the first instalment only after adoption of the operational programme; decommitment three years after expiry of the programme (‘n+3’); reduction of advance payments; 10% of the calculated amount of invoices is withheld from payments until the final statement has been approved; country- specific recommendations may be included in partnership agreements; __________________ 108 Regulation (EU) No 13013/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund and on specific, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and laying down general provisions concerning the Investment for growth and jobs goal the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 10803/2006 (OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 289).
Amendment 305 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 153
Paragraph 153
Amendment 308 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 154
Paragraph 154
154. Regrets furthermore that the termExpects the detailed and operational criteria that will allow the Commission to apply the notion of ‘serious deficiency’, the discovery of which would lead to net corrections, was not conclusively defined in the Regulation, but left to be fleshed out by a delegated act; now, however, has great expectations of the formulation and implementation of this as defined in the recently adopted regulation, to be laid down in a delegated act;
Amendment 313 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 156 a (new)
Paragraph 156 a (new)
156a. Calls on the Commission to define and take rapid action to address the weaknesses of the audit system in the policy areas of agriculture and cohesion;
Amendment 316 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 157
Paragraph 157
Amendment 331 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 158
Paragraph 158
Amendment 334 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 159
Paragraph 159
Amendment 336 #
2013/2195(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 160
Paragraph 160
Amendment 27 #
2013/2176(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Emphasises the role of financial instruments as a means of supporting SMEs through loans, guarantees or equity stakes; emphasises that an increase in the use of these instruments, alongside European structural and investment funds, will be desirable in the new programming period 2014-2020, and urges the Member States to take advantage of these opportunities;
Amendment 38 #
2013/2128(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
Amendment 58 #
2013/2128(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Highlights that under the new ESIF regulations for the period 2014-2020, Member States are obligated to concentrate ESIF resources on investments for a smart, sustainable and inclusive Europe; welcomes the minimum share to be set out for regions to concentrate, depending on their level of economic development, up toat least 20 % of ERDF resources on the production and distribution of energy derived from renewable sources, energy efficiency, cogeneration of heat and energy, and low-carbon strategies, with particular emphasis on urban areas, as well as from smart grids at the distribution level; points out that the Cohesion Fund also allows for investment in this area and calls on the Member States to make best use of this new opportunity; points out, with regard to investments not covered by compulsory thematic concentration, that the ERDF may also be used to support the development of smart systems for the distribution, storage and transmission of energy and to integrate distributed energy generation from renewable resources;
Amendment 63 #
2013/2095(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 38
Paragraph 38
38. Is encouraged by the fact that some Member States are looking at developing the use of new instruments such as Community-Led Local Development (CLLD), Integrated Territorial Investments and Joint Action Plans; understands that there is, however, a mixed response to the new instruments and that evidencean analysis of Member States’ current plans shows that CLLD is beingwill be more widely implemented than ITIs; recognises that it remains to be seen how the initial preparations will translate into these instruments being fully implemented;
Amendment 3 #
2013/2094(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
Aa. whereas supporting research, development and innovation is one of the objectives of cohesion policy that is subject to obligatory thematic concentration under the European Regional Development Fund for 2014-2020;
Amendment 54 #
2013/2094(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Emphasises the many opportunities for funding these actions under the European Regional Development Fund for 2014-2020, including through supporting business incubators, developing links and synergies between businesses, research and development facilities and higher education institutes, and promoting clusters and open innovations through smart specialisation;
Amendment 8 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 18 c (new)
Citation 18 c (new)
- having regard to Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) motion for resolution of 11 May 2010 on 'Sex-selective abortion – 'Gendercide'', inviting its Member States to 'condemn sex-selective abortion, wherever and whenever it occurs',
Amendment 10 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21
Citation 21
– having regard to the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, especially Article 10 (Freedom of thought, conscience and religion) recognizing the right to conscientious objection;
Amendment 12 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 22 a (new)
Citation 22 a (new)
- having regard to ECJ ruling C-34/10 stating that as a matter of scientific fact a new human life begins at conception, and that the human embryo constitutes a precise stage in the development of the human body;
Amendment 15 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 32 a (new)
Citation 32 a (new)
- having regard to its recommendation to the Council of 13 June 2013 on the draft EU Guidelines on the Promotion and Protection of Freedom of Religion or Belief (P7_TA(2013)027);
Amendment 17 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas sexual and reproductive rights are human rights, the violations of which constitute breaches of women's and girls' rights to equalitywomen and girls are entitled to enjoy equal opportunities, non- discrimination based on sex, dignity and health, and freedom from inhuman and degrading treatment;
Amendment 20 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
Recital A a (new)
A a. whereas there is no international legal obligation to provide access to abortion based on any ground, including but not limited to health, privacy, non- discrimination or sexual autonomy;
Amendment 28 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
B a. whereas no international legally binding treaties or conventions define the term "sexual and reproductive health and rights" ; whereas the WHO dictionary demonstrates the "inclusive language" approach: "sexual and reproductive health" includes "methods of fertility regulation" which includes "termination of pregnancies (abortion)"
Amendment 67 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital K a (new)
Recital K a (new)
K a. whereas UN Treaty monitoring bodies have no competency to interpret these treaties in ways that create new State obligations or that alter the substance of the treaties; accordingly, any UN treaty monitoring body that interprets a treaty to include a right to abortion acts beyond its authority and contrary to its mandate ; whereas such ultra vires acts do not create any legal obligations for states parties to the treaty, nor should states accept them as contributing to the formation of new customary international law;
Amendment 73 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Amendment 94 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that even though it is a competence of Member States to formulate and implement policies on SRHR, the EU can exercise policy-making competence in the area of public health and of non- discrimination, and support better implementation of sexual and reproductive rights;
Amendment 117 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. recalls that there exists no "human right to abortion" under international law, either by way of treaty obligation or under customary international law, and recalls that no international legally binding United Nations treaty can accurately be cited as establishing or recognizing a right to abortion;
Amendment 119 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 2 a (new)
Subheading 2 a (new)
upholds the universal human right to conscientious objection together with the responsibility of the State to ensure that patients are able to access lawful medical care in a timely manner in particular in cases of emergency prenatal and maternal health care, and recalls that no person, hospital or institution shall be coerced, held liable or discriminated against in any manner because of a refusal to perform, accommodate, assist or submit to an abortion or any act which could cause the death of a human foetus or embryo, for any reason;
Amendment 131 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 135 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10 a. recalls that abortion is not mentioned in any internationally binding UN human rights treaty;
Amendment 137 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 167 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses that sexuality education mustay include the teaching of natural family planning methods, the fight against stereotypes and prejudices, shed light on gender and sexual orientation discrimination, based on sex and structural barriers to substantive equality, as well as emphasise mutual respect and shared responsibility;
Amendment 186 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Condemns any violation of the bodily integrity of women, as well as harmful practices intended to control women's sexuality and reproductive self- determination; underlines that these are serious human rights violations that the Member States have a responsibility to urgently address;
Amendment 197 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Reminds the Member States that investments in reproductiveprenatal and maternal health and natural family planning are among the most cost- effective, in terms of development, and the most effective ways to promote the sustainable development of a country;
Amendment 204 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Urges the Commission to ensure that European development cooperation adopts a human rights-based approach and that it has a strong and explicit focus, and concrete targets on SRHRprenatal and maternal health;
Amendment 209 #
2013/2040(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23 a. calls on EU delegations in developing countries to work with the governments of those countries to ensure that girl children enjoy their rights without discrimination based on their sex, inter alia by ending the unethical and discriminatory practices of prenatal sex selection, abortion of female foetuses, female infanticide, early forced marriage, female genital mutilation;
Amendment 59 #
2013/2038(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recalls the 2009 relaxation of European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) regulations regarding energy efficiency, making housing eligible for support in all parts of EU, with a cap of 4 %; notes with concern that, in practice, this policy action has not resulted in a substantial increase of funds diverted to this objective, which is the result of a late change to the provisions, namely a modification of operational programmes, made during the programming period; points at the importance of legal clarity regarding EE measures before the start of the new programming period 2014-2020;
Amendment 5 #
2012/2027(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Urges a legal definition of FI to be includedadopted as soon as possible in the upcoming revised Financial Regulation and to become a coherent reference in all legislative acts dealing with FI; stresses the importance of guaranteeing clarity, simplicity and transparency of the FI legal framework in a timely manner and before the start of the next programming period, so as to ensure that FI are attractive to public and private investors;
Amendment 13 #
2012/2027(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that adequate monitoring, reporting and auditing are of the utmost importance in order to ensure that EU resources are being used for the purpose intended; calls on the Commission to strengthen the reporting requirements for managing authorities during the programming period, introduce sufficiently frequent audits and deliver to the European Parliament an annual synthesis report on the use and effectiveness of FI across the various CSF funds, thematic objectives and Member States;
Amendment 15 #
2012/2027(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Is concerned about the limited institutional capacity of the Commission to accommodate the projected increased role of FI; bBelieves that know-how and the technical capacity for using and managing FI should also be strengthened at the level of managing authorities, financial intermediaries and banks; stresses that better knowledge of FI among those responsible for implementation of public policies is vital in order to remove constraints of a cultural nature and promote the success of FI;
Amendment 18 #
2012/2027(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Encourages the Commission to use the experience of the instruments such as JEREMIE, JESSICA, JASMINE which are crucial for Europe's regions, towns and cities while defining the new era of financial instruments for the 2014-2020 programming period;
Amendment 19 #
2012/2027(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6 b. Believes that the role of various national and regional banking institutions having the necessary experience and know-how in reference to the local and regional specificities in the development and implementation of financial instruments needs to be acknowledged;
Amendment 201 #
2012/0244(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Regulation (EU) No 1093/2010
Article 19 – paragraph 3a
Article 19 – paragraph 3a
"3a. Where the Authority requests the ECB as competent authority to take specific action or to refrain from action in accordance with paragraph 3, the ECBcompetent authority shall comply with it or shall within ten working days of the receipt of the request provide adequate justification to the Authority for its non-compliance."
Amendment 1 #
Amendment 16 #
2011/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Highlights the importance of strengthening existing and promoting new urban-rural linkages;
Amendment 17 #
2011/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9 b. Underlines the potential of European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) in strengthening territorial cooperation within the EU;
Amendment 18 #
2011/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 47 #
2011/2312(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Welcomes further clarification on the scope of ITIs and the potential for the instrument, if it fits local needs, to be used in non-urban areas; is of the opinion that the implementation of ITIs should be possible with the use of all funds covered by the CPR;
Amendment 37 #
2011/2311(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 41 #
2011/2311(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9 a. Encourages the Commission to promote networking and exchange of experience between cities; stresses however that existing programmes and bodies should be used for this purpose before creating new structures;
Amendment 43 #
2011/2311(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. AppreciatWelcomes the provision ofor a reserveing- fencing of at least 5 % of the ERDF funds, to be assigned directly to municipalities to promote sustainable urban developmentresources for integrated actions for sustainable urban development to be delegated to cities for management; is of the opinion that the resources should be used for development in functional urban areas;
Amendment 47 #
2011/2311(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. StresOpposes however, the rigidity of the constraint on the use of the above resources under the Integrated Territorial Investments (ITI);
Amendment 5 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Notes the different approaches taken by the Court of Auditors and the Commission to quantify errors; calls for the harmonisation of methodology in order to ensure transparency;
Amendment 6 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Notes the lack of precision in the Court of Auditors' communication about the most likely level of error over recent years, and references to either the lower error limit or to the average error limit calculated by the Court of Auditors; calls for clear and consistent methodology to be applied in this respect to ensure the comparability and a reliable analysis of the evolution of data over the years;
Amendment 15 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Welcomes the explanation by the Commission which states, for the first time, that the large majority of errors are concentrated in only three Member States and only in several operational programmes.
Amendment 50 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Attributes this development mainly to the increase of the most likely error rate in the area of Cohesion, Energy and Transport which marked a significant increase to 7,7 %;
Amendment 121 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58
Paragraph 58
58. Notes, furthermore, that the co- financing rates for Member States in difficulties were increased for the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), the Structural Funds, the Cohesion Fund and the European Fisheries Fund; believes that this measure increases the risk of error;
Amendment 154 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 76 a (new)
Paragraph 76 a (new)
76a. Encourages the Court of Auditors to examine the possibility to respond to the ongoing problem of multiannuality of the implementation of funds and the annuality of the Court's audits; stresses that during the implementation period the error rate tends to be higher than at the closure when the expenditure has undergone all levels of control;
Amendment 160 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 81
Paragraph 81
81. Deplores the fact that the error rate in Cohesion, and in particular in Regional Policy, has increased despite the increased use of interruptions and despite the fact that the Commission has identified the Member States and the regions which contribute most to the error rate; views this as an indication that interruptions are not effective in convincing Member States to remedy weaknesses and to correct errors;
Amendment 166 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 86
Paragraph 86
Amendment 167 #
2011/2201(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 88 – indent 1
Paragraph 88 – indent 1
Amendment 77 #
2011/2195(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 46 #
2011/2179(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 5 #
2011/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
Amendment 28 #
2011/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas delayed investment in Europe compared with other global powers is essentially due to a lack of private investment and the attractiveness of FP7 for the industrial sector is thus not fully demonstrated; but also, beyond the sums involved, there is a clear need for better coordination between the Union, the Member States, and the Unregions,
Amendment 174 #
2011/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the results of FP7 in favour of SMEs, as regards both the 15% target set in the ‘Cooperation’ chapter and the ‘Eurostars’ programme; is of the opinion that better coordination between FP7 and the Structural Funds could facilitate the participation of under-represented Member States; consequently, calls on the Commission and the national and local authorities to improve the link between the cohesion funds and the Research Framework Programme as these funds should be used to enhance research infrastructure to enable research to reach the level of excellence necessary for access to research funds; in this respect underlines the need to set clear objectives and to assess whether the goals were achieved in these Member States;
Amendment 182 #
2011/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Welcomes the results of FP7 in favour of SMEs, as regards both the 15% target set in the ‘Cooperation’ chapter and the ‘Eurostars’ programme; is of the opinion that better coordination, coherence and synergy between FP7 and the Structural Funds could facilitate the participation of under-represented Member States;
Amendment 183 #
2011/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. In this respect, stresses the importance of cohesion policy as this has become a major source of European support in the field of Research & Development and Innovation, as the Member States – in conformity with the second Community Strategic Guideline on cohesion – have devoted a significant amount of their total financial allocations to R&D&I of a knowledge-based economy, resulting in 246 national or regional operational programmes with around EUR 86 billion allocated to R&D&I;
Amendment 200 #
2011/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Proposes that research and development policies be territorialised; therefore stresses the importance of adapting the research and innovation policies to the specific needs of the territories; notes that since the involvement of regional and local authorities in the design and execution of the research and innovation programmes becomes crucial due to the impossibility of applying the same strategy for development to all the regions;
Amendment 249 #
2011/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Is of the opinion that commercialisation should be included in the parameters of future calls for projects under FP7 in the field of research and innovation;
Amendment 253 #
2011/2043(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)
Paragraph 22 a (new)
22a. Stresses the importance of better assistance in the implementation of policies and programmes that enhance the synergies within the research and development value chain (infrastructures - innovation - job creation);
Amendment 13 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Amendment 31 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 293 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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 #
2011/2035(INI)
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);
Amendment 59 #
2011/0455(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8
Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union
Article 27 – paragraph 2
Article 27 – paragraph 2
The principle of the equality of Union's citizens shall allow each institution to adopt corrective measures following the observation of a long lasting and significant imbalance between nationalities among officials, taking into account the breakdown into each category and into each grade, which is not justified by objective criteria. These corrective measures shall never result in recruitment criteria other than those based on merit. Before such corrective measures are adopted, the appointing authority of the institution concerned shall adopt general provisions for giving effect to this paragraph in accordance with Article 110.
Amendment 39 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Experience with the current financial framework shows that many Member States, which are eligible to the Cohesion Fund, are facing significant obstacles in delivering on time complex cross-border transport infrastructure projects with a high Union added value. Therefore, in order to improve the delivery of transport projects, in particular cross-border ones, with a high Union added value, part of the Cohesion Fund allocation (EUR 10XXX billion) should be transferred to finance transport projects on the transport core network in the Member States eligible to the Cohesion Fund under the Connecting Europe Facility. The Commission should support Member States eligible to the Cohesion Fund to develop an adequate pipeline of projects in order to give greatest possible priority to the national allocations under the Cohesion Fund.
Amendment 41 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13
Recital 13
(13) Experience with the current financial framework shows that many Member States, which are eligible to the Cohesion Fund, are facing significant obstacles in delivering on time complex cross-border transport infrastructure projects with a high Union added value. Therefore, in order to improve the delivery of transport projects, in particular cross-border ones, with a high Union added value, part of the Cohesion Fund allocation (EUR 10 billion) should be transferred to finance transport projects on the transport core network in the Member States eligible to the Cohesion Fund under the Connecting Europe Facilityrespecting national allocations for the projects listed in the Annex of this Regulation. The Commission should support Member States eligible to the Cohesion Fund to develop an adequate pipeline of projects in order to give greatest possible priority to the national allocations under the Cohesion Fund.
Amendment 78 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) transport: EUR 31 694 000 000, out of which EUR 10 000 000 000XXX shall be transferred from the Cohesion Fund to be spent in line with this Regulation in Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund;
Amendment 80 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point a
(a) transport: EUR 31 694 000 000, out of which EUR 10 000 000 000 shall be transferred from the Cohesion Fund to be spent in line with this Regulation in Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fundfor projects listed in the Annex to this Regulation, respecting the national allocations;
Amendment 84 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3
Article 5 – paragraph 3
3. Following the mid-term evaluation according to Article 26.1, the Commission may transfer appropriations between the sectors of the allocation set out in paragraph 1, with the exception of the EUR 10 000 000 000XXX transferred from the Cohesion Fund to finance transport sector projects in the Cohesion Fund eligible Member States.
Amendment 114 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1
Article 11 – paragraph 1
1. As regards the EUR 10 000 000 000XXX transferred from the Cohesion Fund [Regulation XXX Article XX] to be spent in Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund, specific calls shall be launched for projects implementing the core network exclusively in Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund.
Amendment 120 #
2011/0302(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
Article 11 – paragraph 3 – introductory part
3. By the way of derogation from Article 10, and as regards the EUR 10 000 000 000XXX transferred from the Cohesion Fund [Regulation XXX Article XX] to be spent in Member States eligible for funding from the Cohesion Fund, the maximum funding rates shall be those applicable to the Cohesion Fund referred to in Article 22 and Article 110.3 of Regulation (EU) No XXX2012 [Regulation laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund covered by the Common Strategic Framework and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006] for the following actions:
Amendment 37 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) It is necessary to fix the limits of those resources for the ‘Investment for growth and jobs’ goal and to adopt objective criteria for their allocation to regions and Member States. In order to encourage the necessary acceleration of development of infrastructure in transport and energy as well as information and communication technologies across the Union, a Connecting Europe Facility should be created. The allocation of the annual appropriations from the Funds and the amounts transferred from the Cohesion Fund to the Connecting Europe Facility to a Member State should be limited to a ceiling that would be fixed taking into account the capacity of that particular Member State to absorb these appropriations. In addition, in line with the headline target on poverty reduction, it is necessary to reorient the scheme for food support for the most deprived persons to promote social inclusion and the harmonious development of the Union. A mechanism is envisaged which transfers resources to this instrument and ensures that these will be constituted from ESF allocations through an implicit corresponding decrease of the minimum percentage of the Structural Funds to be allocated to the ESF in each country.
Amendment 42 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 90
Recital 90
(90) The Commission should be empowered to adopt, by means of implementing acts, as regards all CSF Funds, decisions approving the Partnership Contracts, decisions on the allocation of the performance reserve, decisions suspending payments linked to Member States' economic policies, and, in the case of decommitment, decisions to amend decisions adopting programmes; and as regards the Funds, decisions identifying the regions and Member States fulfilling the Investment for growth and jobs criteria, decisions setting out the annual breakdown of commitment appropriations to the Member States, decisions setting out the amount to be transferred from each Member State's CF allocation to the Connecting Europe Facility, decisions setting out the amount to be transferred from each Member State's Structural Funds allocation for food for deprived people, decisions adopting and amending operational programmes, decisions on major projects, decisions on joint action plans, decisions suspending payments and decisions on financial corrections.
Amendment 46 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 4 – paragraph 7
Part 2 – article 4 – paragraph 7
7. The part of the Union budget allocated to the CSF Funds shall be implemented within the framework of shared management between the Member States and the Commission, in accordance with Article 53(b) of the Financial Regulation, with the exception of the amount of the CF transferred to the Connecting Europe Facility referred to in Article 84(4) and innovative actions at the initiative of the Commission under Article 9 of the ERDF Regulation, and technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission.
Amendment 77 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 3
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 3
Amendment 79 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 80 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 81 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 82 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4
Amendment 299 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 57
Recital 57
(57) It is necessary to fix the limits of those resources for the ‘Investment for growth and jobs’ goal and to adopt objective criteria for their allocation to regions and Member States. In order to encourage the necessary acceleration of development of infrastructure in transport and energy as well as information and communication technologies across the Union, a Connecting Europe Facility should be created. The allocation of the annual appropriations from the Funds and the amounts transferred from the Cohesion Fund to the Connecting Europe Facility to a Member State should be limited to a ceiling that would be fixed taking into account the capacity of that particular Member State to absorb these appropriations. In addition, in line with the headline target on poverty reduction, it is necessary to reorient the scheme for food support for the most deprived persons to promote social inclusion and the harmonious development of the Union. A mechanism is envisaged which transfers resources to this instrument and ensures that these will be constituted from ESF allocations through an implicit corresponding decrease of the minimum percentage of the Structural Funds to be allocated to the ESF in each country.
Amendment 319 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 65
Recital 65
(65) Where an urban or territorial development strategy requires an integrated approach because it involves investments under more than one priority axis of one or several operational programmes, action supported by the Funds should be carried out as an integrated territorial investment within an operational programme.
Amendment 343 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 87
Recital 87
(87) The frequency of audits on operations should be proportionate to the extent of the Union's support from the Funds. In particular, the number of audits s carried out should be reduced where the total eligible expenditure for an operation does not exceed EUR 1200 000. Nevertheless, it should be possible to carry out audits at any time where there is evidence of an irregularity or fraud, or, following closure of a completed operation, as part of an audit sample. In order that the level of auditing by the Commission is proportionate to the risk, the Commission should be able to reduce its audit work in relation to operational programmes where there are no significant deficiencies or where the audit authority can be relied on.
Amendment 351 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 90
Recital 90
(90) The Commission should be empowered to adopt, by means of implementing acts, as regards all CSF Funds, decisions approving the Partnership Contracts, decisions on the allocation of the performance reserve, decisions suspending payments linked to Member States' economic policies, and, in the case of decommitment, decisions to amend decisions adopting programmes; and as regards the Funds, decisions identifying the regions and Member States fulfilling the Investment for growth and jobs criteria, decisions setting out the annual breakdown of commitment appropriations to the Member States, decisions setting out the amount to be transferred from each Member State's CF allocation to the Connecting Europe Facility, decisions setting out the amount to be transferred from each Member State's Structural Funds allocation for food for deprived people, decisions adopting and amending operational programmes, decisions on major projects, decisions on joint action plans, decisions suspending payments and decisions on financial corrections.
Amendment 392 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 4 – paragraph 7
Part 2 – article 4 – paragraph 7
7. The part of the Union budget allocated to the CSF Funds shall be implemented within the framework of shared management between the Member States and the Commission, in accordance with Article 53(b) of the Financial Regulation, with the exception of the amount of the CF transferred to the Connecting Europe Facility referred to in Article 84(4) and innovative actions at the initiative of the Commission under Article 9 of the ERDF Regulation, and technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission.
Amendment 421 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
Part 2 – article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) churches and religious communities active in the areas of transnational cooperation, education, culture and social inclusion.
Amendment 602 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii
(ii) the arrangements to ensure an integrated approach to the use of the CSF Funds for the territorial development of different types of territories including urban, rural, coastal and fisheries areas and areas with particular territorial features, in particular the implementation arrangements for Articles 28, 29 and 99 accompanied, where appropriate, by a list of the cities to participate in the urban development platform referred to in Article 8 of the ERDF Regulation;
Amendment 785 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 26 – paragraph 2
Part 2 – article 26 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission shall assess the information provided in accordance with paragraph 1, taking account of the justification provided by the Member State. The Commission may make observations and the Member State shall provide to the Commission all necessary additional information. In accordance with Fund- specific rules, the Commission shall approve requests for amendment of a programme no later than fivthree months after their formal submission by the Member State provided that any observations made by the Commission have been satisfactorily taken into account. The Commission shall, where necessary, amend at the same time the decision approving the Partnership Contract in accordance with Article 15(3).
Amendment 792 #
Amendment 793 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 27 a (new)
Part 2 – article 27 a (new)
Amendment 1068 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 55 – paragraph 4
Part 2 – article 55 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1092 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 59 – paragraph 3 – point c
Part 2 – article 59 – paragraph 3 – point c
(c) value added tax. However, VAT amounts shall be eligible where they are not recoverable under national VAT legislation and are paid by a beneficiary other than non-taxable person as defined in the first subparagraph of Article 13(1) of Directive 2006/112/EC, provided that such VAT amounts are not incurred in relation to the provision of infrastructure.
Amendment 1274 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 3
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1290 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 1
Amendment 1293 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2
Amendment 1295 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 3
Amendment 1297 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 4
Amendment 1434 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 90 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 90 – paragraph 1
As part of an operational programme or operational programmes, the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund may support an operation comprising a series of works, activities or services intended in itself to accomplish an indivisible task of a precise economic or technical nature which has clearly identified goals and whose total eligible cost exceeds EUR 50 000 000, and in case of operations contributing to the thematic objective set out in point 7 of Article 9 where the total eligible cost exceeds EUR 75 000 000 (a ‘major project’). Financial instruments shall not be considered major projects.
Amendment 1461 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 92 – paragraph 4
Part 3 – article 92 – paragraph 4
4. Expenditure relating to major projects shall notmay be included in a request for payment applications before adoption of an approval decision byafter the submission of the major project for approval to the Commission.
Amendment 1492 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 1
Amendment 1493 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – chapter 4 – title
Part 3 – chapter 4 – title
Territorial development 1 __________________ 1 The whole chapter IV "Territorial development" shall be moved to Part One of the Regulation.
Amendment 1499 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 2
Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 2
Amendment 1505 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 3
Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 3
Amendment 1508 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 4
Part 3 – article 99 – paragraph 4
Amendment 1610 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 110 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
Part 3 – article 110 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2
The co-financing rate at the level of each priority axis of operational programmes under the European territorial cooperation goal shall be no higher than 75%. For programmes with the participation of less developed regions the co-financing rate may be increased by additional ten percentage points (up to 85%).
Amendment 1707 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 124 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
Part 3 – article 124 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b
(b) in 2015: 13 % of the amount of support from the Funds for the entire programming period to the operational programme;
Amendment 1714 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 124 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
Part 3 – article 124 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c
(c) in 2016: 12 % of the amount of support from the Funds for the entire programming period to the operational programme.
Amendment 1723 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 127 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
Part 3 – article 127 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1
The Commission shall decommit any part of the amount calculated in accordance with the second subparagraph in an operational programme that has not been used for payment of the initial and annual pre-financing, interim payments and annual balance by 31 December of the seconthird financial year following the year of budget commitment under the operational programme or for which a payment application drawn up in accordance with Article 121 has not been submitted in accordance with Article 126.
Amendment 1729 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 127 – paragraph 4 a (new)
Part 3 – article 127 – paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. When the Commission takes a decision to authorise a major project, the amounts potentially concerned by automatic decommitment shall be reduced by the annual amounts concerned by such major projects. For these annual amounts, the starting date for the calculation of the automatic decommitment deadlines referred to in point 1 shall be the date of the subsequent decision necessary in order to authorise such major projects.
Amendment 1787 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 137 – paragraph 6
Part 3 – article 137 – paragraph 6
Amendment 1796 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 140 – paragraph 1
Part 3 – article 140 – paragraph 1
1. Operations for which the total eligible expenditure does not exceed EUR 1200 000 shall not be subject to more than one audit by either the audit authority or the Commission prior to the closure of all the expenditure concerned under Article 131. Other operations shall not be subject to more than one audit per accounting year by the audit authority and the Commission prior to the closure of all the expenditure concerned under Article 131. These provisions are without prejudice to paragraph 4.
Amendment 1935 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.6 – Paragraph 1.6.2 a (new)
Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.6 – Paragraph 1.6.2 a (new)
1.6.2a To fully address the principle of territorial cohesion, the integrated approach to promoting smart, sustainable and inclusive growth needs to reflect the role of cities, rural areas, fisheries and coastal areas, areas facing specific geographical or demographic problems, and take account of the specific challenges of the outermost regions, the northernmost regions with a very low population density and of island, cross- border or mountain regions. It also needs to address urban-rural linkages, in terms of access to affordable, quality infrastructures and services.
Amendment 1944 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.6 – Paragraph 1.6.5
Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.6 – Paragraph 1.6.5
1.6.5 So as to foster good policies which are tailored to specific regional needs, Member States and regions must further develop an integrated territorial approach to policy design and delivery, taking account of relevant contextual aspects but focusing on the basis of the following central elements: a) an evaluation of the region's Europe 2020 development potential and capacity; b) an evaluation and assessment of implementation of new territorial instruments such as Integrated territorial investments, Joint Action Plans and Community-led local development; c) an assessment of the development challenges facing the region and its ability to address them; d) consideration of the appropriate territorial scale and context for policy design and delivery, according to the subsidiarity principle; e) design of the multi-level governance arrangements necessary to ensure effective policy delivery; f) the choice of appropriate result and outcome indicators, to be used for policy monitoring and evaluation.
Amendment 2002 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex -I (new) – Part 3 – Paragraph 3.2
Annex -I (new) – Part 3 – Paragraph 3.2
Amendment 2009 #
2011/0276(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex -I (new) – Part 4 – Paragraph 4.4
Annex -I (new) – Part 4 – Paragraph 4.4
4. Priorities for territorial coordination (cross-border, transnational and interregional) 4.1 Great potential for regional development, job creation and cohesion lies in cooperation that goes beyond administrative borders and attempts to overcome the natural ones. Co-operation based on a shared need in a shared territory is often the most effective one. 4.2 Cross-border cooperation derives from an understanding that many challenges do not stop at administrative borders. An effective response requires joint, cooperative action and sharing of knowledge at the appropriate territorial level. 4.3 Furthermore, the embedded potential of border regions may be tapped through locally oriented support measures. 4.4 Overcoming barriers needs to be part of the programming of the Funds covered by the CPR – the objectives of the existing macro-regional strategies must be reflected in the needs analysis and goal setting for the relevant operational programmes from the planning phase on. Those strategies will not have served their purpose unless the objectives of the macro-regional strategies form part of the strategic planning in cohesion policy programmes in the regions and Member States concerned. 4.5 At the same time, Member States and regions must ensure that territorial cooperation programmes make an effective contribution to the Europe 2020 objectives. Member States and regions can thus foster cooperation as well as test, pilot and introduce new solutions, making sure that cooperation is organised in support of the wider policy goals. Where needed, territorial cooperation must be used to bring together policy-makers from across borders to work towards overcoming common problems. 4.6 Member States and regions must view the territorial cooperation programmes primarily as useful tools in overcoming barriers to co-operation, which would in turn support national and regional policy goals with impact beyond the programme area.
Amendment 1 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 j (new)
Recital 5 j (new)
(5j) In order to increase flexibility and reduce administrative burden by allowing joint implementation, the ERDF and the Cohesion Fund investment priorities under the corresponding thematic objectives should be aligned.
Amendment 2 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11
Article 11
1. The specific additional allocation for the outermost regions shall not be subject to Article 4 and be used to offset the additional costs, linked to the chandicapracteristics and constraints referred to in Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, incurred in the outermost regions in supporting: (a) the thematic objectives set out in Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR]; (b) freight transport services and start-up aid for transport services; (c) operations linked to storage constraints, the excessive size and maintenance of production tools, and lack of human capital in the local market. At least 50% of the specific additional allocation shall be allocated to actions contributing to the diversification and modernisation of the economies of the outermost regions, with a particular focus on the thematic objectives set out in points 1, 2 and 3 of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR]. 2. The specific additional allocation may also be used to help finance operating aid and expenditure covering public service obligations and contracts in the outermost regions. 3. The amount to which the rate of co- financing applies shall be proportionate to the additional costs referred to in paragraph 1 incurred by the beneficiary in the case of operating aid and expenditure covering public service obligations and contracts only, and may cover the total eligible costs in the case of expenditure for investment. 4. Financing under this Article shall not be used to support: (a) operations involving products falling within Annex I to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; (b) aids to transport of persons authorised under Article 107(2)(a) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union; (c) tax exemptions and exemption of social charges. 4a. By derogation from Article 3(1), points (a), (aa) and (b), the ERDF may support productive investments in enterprises in the outermost regions, irrespectively of their size. 4 b. The ERDF part of the special allocation for the outermost region of Mayotte shall not be subject to Article 4 of this Regulation, and at least 50% shall be allocated to the thematic objectives set out in points 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No [... ]/2013 [CPR].
Amendment 3 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – Research, Innovation
Annex – Research, Innovation
UNIT NAME NAME Research, Innovation Persons Number of R&D deleted deleted personnel/researchers Full time Number of new working in newly built or equivalents researchers in supported equipped research ntities infrastructureFull time Number of researchers Enterprises Number of enterprises equivalents working in improved cooperating with assisted research infrastructure research institutionfacilities Full time Enterprises Number of posts for R&Denterprises equivalents personnel/ cooperating with researchers created in assisted entitieinstitutions EUR EUR Private investment matching public support in innovation or R&D projects Enterprises Number of enterprises that supported to introduced new or significantly improved products, new to the market as a result of supported innovation or R&D projectsto the market products Enterprises Number of enterprises that supported to introduced new or significantly improved products, new to the firm as a result of supported innovation or R&D projeto the firm products
Amendment 4 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – Energy and Climate change
Annex – Energy and Climate change
Amendment 5 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – Social infrastructure
Annex – Social infrastructure
UNIT NAME Social infrastructure Childcare & education Persons Service cCapacity of supported supported childcare or education education infrastructure Health Persons Capacity of supportedPopulation covered by improved health services Housing Households Number of households benefiting from improved housing conditions Cultural heritage Visits Number of visits at supported sitesdeleted deleted
Amendment 6 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Annex – Urban Development
Annex – Urban Development
Amendment 74 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1
Recital 1
(1) Article 176 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides that the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) is intended to help to redress the main regional imbalances in the Union. The ERDF thereforerefore, in accordance with that article and Article 174, second and third paragraphs, of TFEU, the ERDF is to contributes to reducing the gapdisparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the extent to whichbackwardness of the least favoured regions, including rural and urban areas, declining industrial regions, areas withamong which particular attention should be paid to regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural andor demographic handicaps, such as islands, mountainous areas, sparsely populated areas and border regions, are lagging behindthe northernmost regions with very low population density and island, cross- border and mountain regions.
Amendment 75 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3
Recital 3
(3) Specific provisions concerning the type of activities which may be supported by the ERDF underin order to contribute to the investment priorities within the thematic objectives defined in Regulation (EU) No […...]/20123 [CPR] should be laid down. At the same time, expenditure outside the scope of the ERDF should be defined and clarified, including as regardsinvestments to achieve the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in installations falling underfrom the activities listed in Annex I to Directive 2003/87/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 13 October 2003 establishing a scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community and amending Council Directive 96/61/EC.
Amendment 76 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 a (new)
Recital 3 a (new)
(3a) In order to avoid excessive financing, these investments should not be eligible for support from the ERDF as they already benefit financially from the application of Directive 2003/87/EC. This exclusion should not restrict the possibility to use the ERDF to support activities not covered by Annex I of Directive 2003/87/EC even if implemented by the same economic operators, such as energy efficiency investments in the district heating networks, smart energy distribution, storage and transmission systems, measures aimed at reducing air pollution, even if one of their indirect effects is the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions or if they are listed in the national plan referred to in Article 10c(1) of Directive 2003/87/EC.
Amendment 77 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 3 c (new)
Recital 3 c (new)
(3c) It is important to ensure that, in promoting investments in risk management investments, specific risks at regional, cross border and transnational level should be taken into account.
Amendment 78 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5
Recital 5
(5) The ERDF should contribute to the Europe 2020 strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, thus ensuring greater concentration of ERDF support on the priorities of the Union. According to the category of regions supported, the support from the ERDF under the investment for growth and jobs goal should be concentrated on research and innovation, small and medium-sized enterprises and climate change mitigationinformation and communication technologies (ICT), small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and promoting a low carbon economy. This concentration should be attained at national level allowing for flexibility at the level of operational programmes and in different categories of regions and should be adjusted, if appropriate, to take into account Cohesion Fund resources allocated to supporting the investment priorities referred to in Article 3(a) of Regulation (EU) No [...]/2013 [CF]. The degree of concentration should take into account the level of development of the region, the contribution of Cohesion Fund resources if applicable, as well as the specific needs of regions whose GDP per capita for the 2007-13 period was less than 75% of the average GDP of the EU-25 for the reference period, regions designated with the phasing-out status in the 2007- 2013 period and certain NUTS 2 level regions consisting solely of island Member States or of islands.
Amendment 81 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 b (new)
Recital 5 b (new)
(5b) In accordance with Regulation (EU) No […]/2013 [CPR], in order to optimise the added value from investments funded wholly or in part through the Union budget in the field of research and innovation, synergies will be sought in particular between the operation of the ERDF and Horizon 2020 whilst respecting their distinct objectives.
Amendment 82 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 d (new)
Recital 5 d (new)
(5d) In order to promote sustainable regional or local mobility or to reduce air and noise pollution, it is necessary to promote healthy, sustainable and safe modes of transport. Investments in airport infrastructure supported by the ERDF should promote environmentally sustainable air transport inter alia when enhancing regional mobility through connecting secondary and tertiary nodes to TEN-T infrastructure, including through multimodal nodes.
Amendment 84 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 e (new)
Recital 5 e (new)
(5e) In order to promote the achievement of the energy and climate targets set by the Union as part of the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, the ERDF should support investments to promote energy efficiency and security of supply in Member States through, inter alia, the development of smart energy distribution, storage and transmission systems, including through the integration of distributed generation from renewable sources. Member States should be able to invest in energy infrastructures that are consistent with their chosen energy mix in order to meet their security of supply requirements and consistent with their targets under the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth.
Amendment 85 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5 i (new)
Recital 5 i (new)
(5i) It is necessary to specify what additionally can be supported by the ERDF under the European territorial cooperation goal.
Amendment 88 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 11
Recital 11
(11) Specific attention should be paid to the outermost regions, namely byadopting measures under Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union extending, on an exceptional basis, the scope of the ERDF to the financing of operating aid linked to the offsetting of the additional costs resulting from their specific economic and social situation, which is compounded by the handicaps resulting from the factors referred to in Article 349 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, namely their remoteness, insularity, small size, difficult topography and climate and their economic dependence on a few products, the permanence and combination of which severely restrain their development. In order to support the development of existing and new economic activities, at least 50% of the specific additional allocation should be allocated to actions contributing to the diversification and modernisation of the economies of the outermost regionsOperating aid granted by Member States in this context is exempt from the notification obligation laid down in Article 108(3) TFEU, if, at the time it is granted, it fulfils the conditions laid down by a Regulation declaring certain categories of aid compatible with the internal market in application of Articles 107 and 108 TFEU adopted pursuant to Article 1 of Regulation (EC) No 994/98.
Amendment 89 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) In order to define procedures for the selection and implementation of innovative actionsupplement this Regulation with certain non-essential elements, the power to adopt acts in accordance with Article 290 of the Treaty should be delegated to the Commission in respect of the content and scope set out in Article 9detailed rules for the criteria for the selection and management of innovative actions. The Commission should also be empowered to amend the Annex to this Regulation, in order to make adjustments, where justified, to ensure the effective assessment of progress in programme implementation. It is of particular importance that the Commission carries out appropriate consultations during its preparatory work, including at expert level. The Commission, when preparing and drawing-up delegated acts, should ensure a simultaneous, timely and appropriate transmission of relevant documents to the European Parliament and to the Council.
Amendment 90 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – heading and title – paragraph 1
Article 3 – heading and title – paragraph 1
Article 3 Article 3 Scope of support from the ERDF 1. The ERDF shall support the following activities in order to contribute to the investment priorities set out in Article 5: (a) productive investment, which contributes to creating and safeguarding sustainable jobs, through direct aid to investment in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs); (aa) productive investment, irrespective of the size of the enterprise, contributing to the investment priorities set out in Article 5.1 and 5.4, and, if it involves cooperation between large enterprises and SMEs, 5.2; (b) investments in infrastructure providing basic services to citizens in the areas of energy, environment, transport, and information and communication technologies (ICT); (c) investments in business, social, health, research, innovation and educational infrastructure; (d) investment in the development of endogenous potential by supporting regional and local development and research and innovation. These measures shall include: (i) fixed investment in equipment and small-scale infrastructure; (ii) support for and services to enterprises, in particular SMEs; (iii)through fixed investment in equipment and small-scale infrastructure; including small-scale cultural and sustainable tourism infrastructure, services to enterprises, support to public research and innovation bodies and investment in technology and applied research in enterprises; (ive) networking, cooperation and exchange of experience between regions, towns, and relevant social, economic and environmental actors; (e) technical assistance. In more developed regions, the ERDF shall not support investments in infrastructure providing basic services to citizens in the areas of environment, transport, and ICTcompetent regional, local, urban and other public authorities, economic and social partners, and bodies representing civil society referred to in Article 5 of the CPR, studies, preparatory actions and capacity building.
Amendment 93 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2
Article 3 – paragraph 2
2. The ERDF shall not support: (a) the decommissioning and the construction of nuclear power stations; (b) investment to achieve the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in installationfrom activities falling under Annex I to Directive 2003/87/EC; (c) the manufacturing, processing and marketing of tobacco and tobacco products; (d) undertakings in difficulties as defined under Union State aid rules. ; (da) investment in airport infrastructure unless related to environmental protection or accompanied by investments necessary to mitigate or reduce its negative environmental impact.
Amendment 96 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Article 4 – paragraph 1
Amendment 111 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 6
Article 5 – point 6
(6) preserving and protecting the environment and promoting resource efficiency: (a) addressing the significant needs for through: (a) investmenting in the waste sector to meet the requirements of the Union's environmental acquis; (b) and to addressing the significant needs for investment needs, identified by Member States, for investment going beyond those requirements; (b) investing in the water sector to meet the requirements of the Union's environmental acquis; (c) and to address needs, identified by Member States, for investment going beyond those requirements; (c) conserving, protecting, promoting and developing natural and cultural heritage; (d) protecting and restoring biodiversity, soil protection and restoration and promoting ecosystem services including NATURA 2000 and green infrastructures; (e) action to improve the urban environment, including regeneration of brownfield sites and reduction of air pollutionrevitalisation of cities, regeneration and decontamination of brownfield sites (including conversion areas), reduction of air pollution and promotion of noise-reduction measures; (ea) promoting innovative technologies to improve environmental protection and resource efficiency in the waste sector, water sector, soil protection or to reduce air pollution; (eb) supporting industrial transition towards a resource-efficient economy, promoting green growth, eco-innovation and environmental performance management in the public and private sectors;
Amendment 114 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 8
Article 5 – point 8
(8) promoting sustainable and quality employment and supporting labour mobility: (a) through: (a) supporting the development of business incubators and investment support for self- employment, micro-enterprises and business creation; (b)(aa) supporting employment friendly growth through the development of endogenous potential as part of a territorial strategy for specific areas, including the conversion of declining industrial regions and enhancement of accessibility to and development of specific natural and cultural resources; (b) supporting local development initiatives and aid for structures providing neighbourhood services to create new jobs, where such actions are outside the scope of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [ESF]; (c) investing in infrastructure for public employment services;
Amendment 115 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 9
Article 5 – point 9
(9) promoting social inclusion and combating poverty and any discrimination through: (a) investing in health and social infrastructure which contribute to national, regional and local development, reducing inequalities in terms of health status, andpromoting social inclusion through improved access to social, cultural and recreational services and the transition from institutional to community- based services; (b) support for physical and, economic and social regeneration of deprived communities in urban and rural communitieareas; (c) support for social enterprises; (ca) investments undertaken in the context of Community-led local development strategies;
Amendment 117 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 10
Article 5 – point 10
(10) investing in education, training and vocational training for skills and lifelong learning by developing education and training infrastructure;
Amendment 118 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point 11
Article 5 – point 11
(11) enhancing institutional capacity of public authorities and stakeholders and an efficient public administration by strengthening of institutional capacity and the efficiency of public administrations and public services related to implementation of the ERDF, and in support of actions in institutional capacity and in the efficiency of public administration supported by the ESF.
Amendment 120 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 9
Article 9
Article 9 Article 8 Innovative Actions in the field of Innovative Actions in the field of Sustainable Urban Development Sustainable Urban Development 1. At the initiative of the Commission, the ERDF may support innovative actions in the field of sustainable urban development, subject to a ceiling of 0,2% of the total annual ERDF allocation in accordance with Article 84(7) of Regulation (EU) No [...]/2013 [CPR]. They shall include studies and pilot projects to identify or test new solutions to issues relating to sustainable urban development which are of relevance at Union level. The Commission shall encourage the involvement of relevant partners from the categories referred to in Article 5(1) of Regulation (EU) No […]/2013 [CPR] in the preparation and implementation of innovative actions. 2. By derogation to Article 4 aboveof this regulation, innovative actions may support all activities necessary to achieve the thematic objectives set out in Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR] and corresponding investment priorities. 3. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts, in accordance with Article 13 concerning procedur, laying down detailed rules concerning the principles for the selection and implementationmanagement of innovative actions to be supported.
Amendment 121 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4 b (new)
Article 11 – paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. The ERDF part of the special allocation for the outermost region of Mayotte shall not be subject to Article 4 of this Regulation, and at least 50% shall be allocated to the thematic objectives set out in points 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6 of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No [... ]/2013 [CPR].
Amendment 788 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 2
Article 13 – paragraph 2
2. The power to adopt delegated actsdelegation of power referred to in Article 9(3) shall be conferred on the Commission for an indeterminate period of time from 1 January 2014 period of three years from1. The Commission shall draw up a report in respect of the delegation of power not later than nine months before the end of the three year period. The delegation of power shall be tacitly extended until the review of this Regulation, unless the European Parliament or the Council opposes such extension not later than 3 months before the end of that period. __________________ 1 OJ: Please insert date of entry info force of this regulation.
Amendment 789 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3
Article 13 – paragraph 3
3. The delegation of power referred to in Article 9(3) may be revoked at any time by the European Parliament or by the Council. A decision tof revokecation shall put an end to the delegation of the power specified in that decision. It shall take effect the day following the publication of the decision in the Official Journal of the European Union or at a later date specified therein. It shall not affect the validity of any delegated acts already in force.
Amendment 790 #
2011/0275(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 5
Article 13 – paragraph 5
5. A delegated act adopted pursuant to Article 9(3) shall enter into force only if no objection has been expressed either by the European Parliament or the Council within a period of twohree months of notification of that act to the European Parliament and the Council or if, before the expiry of that period, the European Parliament and the Council have both informed the Commission that they will not object. That period shall be extended by twohree months at the initiative of the European Parliament or the Council.
Amendment 36 #
2011/0274(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point b
(b) investment aimed at achieving the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in installations falling under Annex I of Directive 2003/87/EC except district heating and cooling, and combined heat and power plants;
Amendment 47 #
2011/0274(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – point a – subpoint ii
Article 3 – point a – subpoint ii
(ii) promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy use in small and medium-sizedenterprises, irrespective of the size of the enterprises;
Amendment 51 #
2011/0274(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – point a – subpoint iii
Article 3 – point a – subpoint iii
(iii) supporting energy efficiency and renewable energy use in public infrastructures, historical buildings and in the housing sector;
Amendment 89 #
2011/0274(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – point d – subpoint iii
Article 3 – point d – subpoint iii
(iii) developing and rehabilitation of a comprehensive, high quality and interoperable railway systems;
Amendment 201 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 (new)
Point (c) of this Article shall also apply to those regions whose GDP per capita for the 2007-13 period was less than 75% of the average GDP of the EU-25, for the reference period, but which are eligible under the category of transition or more developed regions as defined in points (b) and (c) of Article 82(2) of Regulation (EU) No [ ]/2012 [CPR] in the 2014-2020 period.
Amendment 265 #
2011/0268(COD)
Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2
Article 12 – paragraph 2
2. Complementing ERDF interventions as referred to in Article 7 of Regulation (EU) No [ERDF], the ESF may support sustainable urban development through strategies setting out integrated actions to tackle the economic, environmental, climate, demographic and social challenges affecting urban areas of cities which are listed in the partnership contract.
Amendment 39 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that the EU budget is an investment budget and that 94 % of its total returns are invested in the Member States themselves or for external priorities of the Union; emphasises that, for the regions and Member States, public investment would be minimised or impossible without the contribution of the EU budget; which represents significant and sometimes even dominant share of public investment, believes that any decrease of the EU budget would inevitably hamper the growth and competitive strength of the entire Union economy;
Amendment 45 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls that delivering on the Europe 2020 strategy’s seven flagship initiatives will require a huge amount of future- oriented investment, estimated at no less than EUR 1 800 billion up to 2020 ; sees the significant investment role of the Cohesion Policy in this respect; stresses that one of the main objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy, namely, to promote jobs and high-quality employment for all Europeans, will only be achieved if the necessary investment in education, in favour of a knowledge society, and in research and innovation, SMEs, and green and new technologies is made now and not delayed any longer; favours combining the reduction of public deficits and debt with the promotion of such investments;
Amendment 61 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Considers that the Commission proposal, which represents a freeze of the MFF 2014- 2020 ceilings at the level of the 2013 ceilings, will not be sufficient to finance existing policy priorities linked to the Europe 2020 strategy, the new tasks provided for by the Treaty of Lisbon, or unforeseen events, not to mention the political objectives and commitments set by the European Council itself;
Amendment 70 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Reaffirms, in this context, its position in favour of a significant increase - notably through the Connecting Europe Facility - in the funding available for the Union programmes in the fields of competiveness, SMEs and infrastructures, which are at the heart of the Europe 2020 strategy; strongly believes that further cuts with respect to the Commission proposal will seriously jeopardise the EU’s credibility and its political commitment in favour of growth and jobs; Urges however for the amount transferred from the Cohesion Fund to the Connecting Europe Facility to be spent at least during the first years respecting the national allocations under Cohesion Policy;
Amendment 97 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Recalls its position that, given the wide array of tasks, challenges and objectives that the CAP is called on to respond to, the amounts allocated to the CAP in the budget year 2013 should be at least maintained during the next financial programming period; supports an idea of converging direct payments between and within the Member States; stresses, in this context, the important role played by the second pillar of the CAP, which makes a significant contribution to investment and job creation in rural areas and to enhancing the effectiveness and competitiveness of the farming industry and to the process of overcoming development gaps in rural areas between Member States;
Amendment 98 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Recalls its position that, given the wide array of tasks, challenges and objectives that the CAP is called on to respond to, the amounts allocated to the CAP in the budget year 2013 should be at least maintained during the next financial programming period; supports an idea of converging direct payments between and within the Member States; stresses, in this context, the important role played by the second pillar of the CAP, which makes a significant contribution to investment and job creation in rural areas and to enhancing the effectiveness and competitiveness of the farming industry;
Amendment 102 #
2011/0177(APP)
22a. Is firmly opposed to any cut in funding for the second pillar of the CAP, as this would undo the achievements of previous CAP reforms and drastically reduce the policy's efficiency and effectiveness, particularly in the light of the new challenges referred to, inter alia, in the Europe 2020 strategy;
Amendment 108 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Believes that the programme of assistance to the most deprived persons in the Union should continue after 2013; points out that, in addition to providing tangible proof of the fact that the EU feels a responsibility towards its most deprived citizens, the programme has for more than 20 years been helping to ensure EU food security and agricultural market stability, promote a spirit of solidarity and build a civil society, and is thus helping to meet the Europe 2020 strategy goals; takes the view that the Union budget for this purpose should not be cut;
Amendment 118 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Reiterates its position that the new responsibilities conferred on the EU by the Treaties will require appropriate additional funding compared to MFF 2007-2013, so as to allow the Union to fulfil its role as a global actor and ensure its ambitions in promoting democracy, peace, solidarity, stability and poverty reduction in neighbourhood and partner countries, whilst upholding the undertakings it has already given, notably the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals by 2015; underlines the complementary nature of EU assistance to that provided by the Member States, and its catalyst effect in terms of intervening in regions where bilateral assistance is not delivered; is particularly supportive of joint programming between Member States and EU actions;
Amendment 121 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Is of the firm opinion that the financing of these large-scale projects should be securallowed in the EU budget but, at the same time, ring-fenced, so as to ensure that possible cost overruns do not threaten the funding and successful implementation of other Union policies;
Amendment 125 #
Amendment 162 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Stresses the need for an obligatory mid- term revision to be enshrined in the MFF regulation, with a specific procedure including a binding calendar ensuring the full involvement of the next Parliament; considers that the Commission should table a legislative proposal enabling the revised MFF to be adopted in time for the 2018 budgetary procedure; stresses that mid- term revision should not affect the pre- allocated funds, in order not to hamper stability of investment prospects and protect the beneficiaries and stability of long-term programming and investments;
Amendment 191 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 59 – point 6
Paragraph 59 – point 6
Amendment 199 #
2011/0177(APP)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64 a (new)
Paragraph 64 a (new)
64 a. Opposes any attempt to include policy related provisions under the ordinary legislative procedure into the MFF negotiations;
Amendment 7 #
2010/2158(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the EU contributes through its policies to the sustainable development of urban areas but in line with, it should be considered that in addition to the national urban policies, according to the principle of subsidiarity, European urban policy lies in the competence of Member Statesshould be defined,
Amendment 4 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas territorial cooperation, i.e. cooperation between the inhabitants of different regions, is an ongoing learning process which creates a feeling of community and of having a shared future,
Amendment 7 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas citizens must be placed at the centre of the priorities of territorial cooperation, and therefore a place-based approach should be advocated,
Amendment 9 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas closer territorial cooperation is dependent on progress made with European integration and coordination in all fields, and whereasthat contributes to the European integration and territorial cohesion, and that the territorial cooperation is in itself is a testbed for European integration,
Amendment 11 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is convinced of the European added value of territorial cooperation and the key role it plays in deepening the internal market and fostering closer European integration; in several sectoral policies, and calls for territorial cooperation to remain one of the pillars of cohesion policy;
Amendment 18 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Believes that territorial cooperation has proved its effectiveness and that its potential as a source of competitiveness has so far been insufficiently tapped as a result of the inadequate resources allocated to it; calls for the budget for the ‘territorial cooperation’ objective to be at least 57% of the overall cohesion policy budget for the next programming period;
Amendment 25 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Considers that a distinction should continue to be made between the cross- border component, which meets the local needs of cross-border population catchment areas, and the transnational component, including the so-called macroregional scale, which facilitates cooperation over wider strategic areas;
Amendment 28 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls nonetheless – with a view to ensuring the coherence and continuity of territorial cooperation measures and given the strategic nature of the projects in question – for greater flexibility in exploiting the scope offered by Article 21 of the ERDF Regulation with regard to the location of cross-border and transnational cooperation activities; to that end, calls for a reviewcertain flexibility to be implemented in the application of the geographical limit of 150 km set for cross-border cooperation programmes for coastal and maritime regions;
Amendment 41 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for funds for territorial cooperation no longer to be allocated by Member State, but at EU level and on a programme-by-programme basis, on the basis of the criteria laid down in Annex 2, paragraph 5 of the basic regulationto be allocated for each programme of territorial cooperation on the basis of harmonised criteria so as to provide a strategic, integrated response to the needs of each territory or area involved; invites in this respect the Commission to consider other relevant, strategic and measurable criteria that could reflect the needs of territories and reduceweight the demphasis on the most important criterion: demographyography criteria;
Amendment 51 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses once again the importance of interregional cooperation, but deplores the lack of funds allocated to it; calls for a reduction from 75% to 60% in the Community cofinancing rate of this programme for participants from the regions covered by the ‘competitiveness and employment’ objective, encourages regions to make better use of the scope for interregional cooperation offered by Article 37(6)(b) of the basic regulation in order to raise the number projects in this objective; advocates, therefore, that the ‘interregional’ component of Objective 3 should also be used to facilitate the coordination and running of such projects, to pool know-how and to exchange good practices, on the basis of ever closer cooperation with, and; stresses for the future operational programmes the need to acquire the support of, INTERACT and the capacity for successful assistance schemes, which are to be modelled after the RC LACE project;
Amendment 56 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Invites the Commission to look into ways of involving local and regional councillors in these Europe-wide networks for the exchange of experiences and good pracmplementing the Erasmus pilot project for local and regional elected representaticves;
Amendment 58 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Believes that greater complementarity betweenthe mainstreaming of the ‘territorial cooperation’ objective, on the one hand, and with the ‘convergence’ and ‘competitiveness and employment’ objectives, on the other, is needed; suggests that regional operational programmes should participate in the cross-border and transnational projects that concern them by earmarking funding by territory for priority projects identified in advance and agreed with their partners in the programmes, in accordance with the principles of multi-level governance and the partnership; calls for the programming to be better co-ordinated than it has been before;
Amendment 63 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 68 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Points out that the concept of macro- regions, a Council initiative, came into being as an experimental, logical way of coordinating common projects covering a very large territory, with a view to exploitingmaking use of the advantages of an integrated and multisectoral approach based on common strategic actions receiving support from existing funds; points out that these strategies must neither generate additional expenditure fornew funds in the EU budget, nor necessitate the establishment of new institutions or the application of new ruleslegislation;
Amendment 73 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Points out that the Territorial Co- operation Objective can accommodate the co-operation on a macroregional scale, especially within its transnational strand;
Amendment 74 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Asks the Commission to conduct an in- depth study of the results of the first strategies implemented; believes that the process has met with a level of interest that should be built on; advocates the use of transnational programmes to support these territorial strategies by coordinating the work of devising, framing and steering current and future macro-regional strategies;
Amendment 90 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Advocates, therefore, more effective coordination between the various Commission directorates-general concernedStates that the conditions for cross- border co-operation in the ENPI are not sufficient for its appropriate development; advocates, therefore, more effective coordination between the various Commission directorates-general concerned; is convinced of the ultimate necessity to reintegrate the ENPI cross- border co-operation programmes into the Territorial Co-operation Objective of the cohesion policy;
Amendment 96 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 – indent 1
Paragraph 21 – indent 1
– clarifying the status of EGTCs under national legal systemsthe legal systems of the Member States in order to achieve an appropriate legal alignment in this respect,
Amendment 105 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Calls for the allocation of global grants to EGTCs in order to enable them to directly manage Structural Fund appropriations, and programmes, as well as for the multinational and multilateral nature of EGTCs to be better reflected in regulations governing the other European funds, with a view to improving their access to other sources of financing;
Amendment 108 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Believes that the implementation of territorial cooperation programmes remains overly complicated and considers that Objective 3 needs specially adapa separated rulesegulation;
Amendment 114 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Invites the Commission to propose specific measures which simplify rules on auditing and control, with "one management authority per programme" as a guiding principle, authorise more systematic standard-rate costing, lay down more detailed rules on eligibility for EU funding, make for greater flexibility in the implementation of automatic decommitments, raise the acceptable error rate to 5% and increase technical assistance to 8%, with a view to ensuring that the management bodies concentrate more on the strategic management of projects, rather than whether applications comply with administrative rules;
Amendment 124 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Stresses, furthermore, that arrangements for involving private stakeholders must also bebe broadened and simplified; recommends setting up financial engineering systems, along the lines of the JEREMIE and JESSICA initiatives, to facilitate cross-border projects which generate revenue, the participation of private stakeholders and the establishment of public-private partnerships;
Amendment 130 #
2010/2155(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Considers that, by contributing to helping to fulfil the Europe 2020 strategy's objective of intelligent and inclusive growth, cooperation on education and culture would raise the level of participation of citizens and NGOs as well as to contribute to the raising of the profile of territorial cooperation ands well as to breaking down the ‘mental borders’ that still set citizens apart from one another;
Amendment 1 #
2010/2142(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that cohesion funds are subject to particularly complex rules and are implemented differently from other EU spending areas, which makes them more vulnerable to errors; draws attention to the fact that the error rate in cohesion spending remains the highest of all EU payments with greater than 5 % in 2009; is aware of the decrease in the error rate in comparison todecreased from 11 % in 2008 to just above 5 % in 20089;
Amendment 5 #
2010/2142(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Is concerned that the Directorate General for Regional Policy (DG REGIO) states in its Declaration of Assurance of the Annual Activity Report 2009 that for 38 out of the 79 programmes concerned, DG REGIO does not have reasonable assurance on the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions in relation to reimbursements in 2009 of expenditure declared; asks for further details on missing information with regard to reimbursements in 2009; notes that Member States have an obligation to provide sufficient information in their Annual Activity Reports and asks the Commission to propose a penalty system in case information provided does noto allow the Commission to ensurestablish legality and regularity;
Amendment 7 #
2010/2142(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. In the context of the revision of the Financial Regulation, stresses the need to harmonise rules and management schemes for cohesion programmes under shared managementunder shared management, and in respect of cohesion policy that this harmonisation shall be to the maximum extent possible; notes that any governance problem between the Financial Regulation and the cohesion regulations can be avoided by better alignment of eligibility rules across various policies;
Amendment 63 #
2010/2142(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Notes that the most likely error rate estimated by the Court of Auditors for the policy group ‘Cohesion’ (EUR 23 081 000 000 reimbursed certified expenditure) is above 5 %; however, underlines that the error limit for ‘Cohesion’ decreased from 11 % in 2008 to 3 % in 2009;
Amendment 110 #
2010/2142(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Notes that the present declaration of assurance (DAS) is an expression of the quregularity and legality of the financial management in the Union overall, and that it does not contain information on error rates in individual Member States;
Amendment 189 #
2010/2142(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 64
Paragraph 64
64. Notes that the Court of Auditors estimates that the most likely error rate for the Cohesion policy area is above 5 %; however, further notes that the lower error limit for Cohesion decreased from 11 % in 2008 to 3 % in 2009;
Amendment 196 #
2010/2142(DEC)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 67
Paragraph 67
67. Notes that infringements of procurement procedures reveal a failure to complete the Union internal market and that the reason for these irregularities could be a conflict of interest between the Union and the Members States; asks the Commission and the Court of Auditors to set up a platform for the consultation process on methodology used with regard to the seriousness of the infringements detected in public procurement domain;
Amendment 61 #
2009/2230(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that all actions regarding sector policies with a territorial dimension are of key importance to the Strategy’s success and the achievement of the ambitious goals of further micro-regional strategies, including the common agricultural policy, fisheries policy and industrial, transport policy, industrial policy and research policy, as well as combining available funds intended for jointly defined goals in a given area; in this context a policy review should be carried out with regard to these new challenges and appropriate organisational structures put in place at EU level;
Amendment 106 #
2009/2230(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
21a. Proposes that the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region should be regarded as a European Union strategy, based upon several EU policies, which should have a defined time frame and goals; given its horizontal nature, the strategy could be treated as macro-regional and its coordination linked to regional policy;
Amendment 4 #
2009/2175(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that the Court of Auditors regularly indicateds in its annual reports on the implementation of the EU budget, as well as in the latest Annual Report on the financial year 2008, that failure to comply with EU procurement rules is one of the two most common reasons for refusing EU financing fromcauses of errors and irregularities in the implementation of European projects co-financed by the Structural Funds and the Social Fund; highlights, in this context, that irregularities are often caused by improper transposition and the more stringentof EU rules and differences in the rules applied by Member States; calls on the Commission and the Member States to revise, in cooperation with regional and local authorities, the various sets of rules applicable to public procurement for the various actions and programmes implemented under the Structural Funds in order to unify those rules and simplify the whole legal framework for public procurement, in particular with a view to reducing the risk of errors and increasing efficiency in the use of Structural Funds;
Amendment 7 #
2009/2175(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that it is not only costs and complexity which can be prohibitive, but also the time needed to complete the public procurement process, not least becausein particular the lengthy appeal procedures are obstructed by various actors, and hence welcomes the fact that the recovery plan makes it possible to apply accelerated versions of the procedures outlined in the public procurement directives to major public projects specifically in 2009 and 2010; calls on the Member States to support and assist local authorities in using these new procedures, in each case in compliance with the standard public procurement rules and regulations;
Amendment 12 #
2009/2175(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Deplores the fact that in some cases Structural Fund allocations for infrastructure projects undertaken in the context of a Public Private Partnership (PPP) and related contracts with private operators based on public procurement carried out at sub-national level have, as a result of very complex procurement procedures, led to a loss of European Union subsidies previously available to fund infrastructure development; believes that it is vital to remove obstacles to and establish clear rules for PPPs if the European Union wants to have any chance of making the necessary investments in infrastructure and quality services; calls on the Commission to ensure that public procurement and Structural Fund implementation rules set a clear framework for PPPs in order to create legal certainty for all stakeholders and reduce the pressure on public budgets, in the context of the principle of co-financing and in the aftermath of the global economic crisis;
Amendment 5 #
2009/2167(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Takes note of the European Court of Auditor's report on the implementation of the 2008 budget and deplores the estimated 11 % reimbursement failure rate for cohesion policy; opines that this is partly due to the burdensome administrative procedures and stresses that a simplification of the national and Community legislative framework governing the Structural Fund11 % error rate highlighted by the Court in the chapter on cohesion; stresses that the irregularities highlighted by the Court can, in some situations, respecially as regards management and monitult in fraud, and according procedures, is imperative in the process of improving ply takes the view that determined efforts should be made to reduce the erfrormances rate;
Amendment 15 #
2009/2167(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Urges the Commission and the Member States to act with full responsibility and strengthen their efforts to avoid irregularities, administrative errors and failings and asks for a better demarcation between the concepts of irregularity and suspecte, error and fraud.
Amendment 3 #
2009/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Supports the Commission’s initiative to outline a strategy for a future sustainable transport policy in the EU; stresses the importance of the relationship between cohesion and transport policy in achieving the broader goal of sustainable regional development throughout the EU;
Amendment 22 #
2009/2096(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Notes the increasing trend of urbanisation in Europe; stresses the need to ensure high quality and accessible transport services to citizens in urban areas; highlights the EU’s role in fostering cooperation between urban areas to allow for sharing and exchanging of best practice to make transport systems more sustainable; stresses, in this connection, the significance of the Action Plan on Urban Mobility adopted on 30 September 2009, and expects the measures proposed therein to be introduced swiftly;
Amendment 2 #
2009/2068(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Eagerly awaits the publication of the Commission's communication on the impact of the action plan planned for February 2010, which shoulWelcomes the Commission's communication to the European Parliament, the Council and the Court of Auditors on the impact of the action plan to strengthen the Commission's supervisory role under shared management of structural actions, which shows a significant increase in financial corrections applied in 2008 and 2009 and also contains the results of the first audit carried out by the Commission for a sample of the projects implemented in respect of the 2007-2013 programming period; notes with satisfaction the result of the audit showing a preliminary error rate of 5% that reflects the positive result of the simplification introduced for the 2007- 2013 programming period;
Amendment 3 #
2009/2002(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses that the financing of the second phase of the European Economic Recovery Plan is a priority for the European Parliament; intends to use the tools foreseen in the IB and IIA in order to guarantee its financing; recalls, in this context, that the European Council was not able to present its plans in its draft budget; recalls that the financing agreement should not jeopardise the financial envelopes of the co-decided programmes nor the annual budgetary procedure as outlined in the declaration agreed by the budgetary authority on the financing of the European Recovery Plan of 2 April 2009; recalls also its view on the principles and the prudence required when using available margins under a particular heading;
Amendment 9 #
2009/2002(BUD)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Regrets the cuts introduced by the Council to the PDB in a period when structural and cohesion funds should be used for stimulating economic growth and recovery; proposes systematic increases to payments on the main lines (ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund) to boost implementation of structural policyactions in the Member States, for the benefit of all European citizens;
Amendment 16 #
2008/2334(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Supports the proposed changes to the implementation rules aiming to increase the flexibility of the Structural Funds and to adapt them to meet the needs of the extraordinary economic circumstances. Nevertheless, encourages the Commission to look at the possibility of simplifying the existing instruments;
Amendment 21 #
2008/2334(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3a (new)
Paragraph 3a (new)
3a. Welcomes the establishment by the Commission of the expert group ("task force on simplification") working on further possible simplification of procedures for the implementation of Structural Funds; eagerly awaits further simplification proposals from the Commission foreseen for the beginning of 2009;
Amendment 25 #
2008/2334(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that measures, such as acceleration of payments, the use of lump sum payments and flat rates will stimulate and accelerate the implementation of projects especially in infrastructure and the energy and environmental sectors, and soft ESF projects;
Amendment 9 #
2008/2236(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Encourages the Commission to facilitate the exchange of experiences of and best practices in cross-border cooperation between ENP programmes and projects and action taken under the 'European Territorial cooperation' objective and under the already completed Interreg III A Community initiative; believes, in particular, that training and twinning initiatives for civil service officials should be fostered; suggests, in this context, periodical analyses of the improvements made in terms of capacity and institutional building on both sides of EU borders;
Amendment 18 #
2008/2224(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the particular importance of creating cohesive communication links with targeted content both between the EU and the regvarionus with particular characteristicregions and between the EU and pvarticularious social groups;
Amendment 4 #
2008/2217(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recalls that urban transport is subject to the subsidiarity principle, but nevertheless stresses that local authorities cannot meet these challenges without European cooperation and coordination, so that the Commission must provide studies and a legal framework, finance research, and promote and disseminate best practice; asks the Commission to publish a compendium of the relevantbinding European regulatory provisions in this area and offer regions and cities a common frame of reference to make it easier for them to make choices as regards the planning and implementation of development strategy;
Amendment 6 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Notes in particular that the guidance document on management verifications issued by the Commission in June 2008 in the framework of the Action Plan, underlines the importance of preventive measures by the managing authorities through an effective communication strategy with beneficiaries; considers that all information activities directed to beneficiaries are instrumental in reducing errors, especially in field like the eligibility of expenditure;
Amendment 11 #
2008/2186(DEC)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Expresses some satisfaction at the apparent statistical improvement in Member States' control systems but regrets the fact that that many control systems in Member States remain open to the risk of irregularity in reimbursements; considers that further improvement of the effectiveness of the first level control on national and sub-national level is needed; stresses in this respect the important, supervisory role of the Commission;
Amendment 8 #
2008/2183(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas Member States which joined the European Union before 1 May 2004 were required by the General Regulation on the ERDF, the ESF and the Cohesion Fund to earmark 60% of the total expenditure for the 'cohesionnvergence' objective and 75% for the regional competitiveness and employment objective to priorities related to the Lisbon Strategy, and whereas Member States which joined the European Union on or after 1 May 2004 were recommended to adopt the same approach,
Amendment 116 #
2008/2174(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)
Paragraph 17 a (new)
17a. Considers that a spatial analysis of the entire EU territory should be carried out prior to the setting of individual sectoral policy priorities at the start of each programming period;
Amendment 153 #
2008/2174(INI)
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; underlines, however, that the GDP remains the onlymain eligibility criterion for receiving financial assistance from the Structural Funds;
Amendment 31 #
2008/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Recommends an integrated approach to coastal tourism in the context of the Community's cohesion, maritime, fisheries, environmental and social policies, in order to create synergies and avoid inconsistent actions; recommends that the Commission applytake into account such an integrated approach to the sustainable growth of coastal tourism as a strategic objective ofin its work programme for 2010-2015, also in the context of the mid- term review of the financial framework for 2007-2013;
Amendment 53 #
2008/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 59 #
2008/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 99 #
2008/2132(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Stresses that striving for the territorial cohesion instruments canof the European Union as a whole will enhance the links between coast and hinterland, connecting coastal activities to rural and urban tourism, increasing out-of-season accessibility for tourism, and raising the profile of local products while encouraging their diversification; calls on the Commission, therefore, to include the coastal regions in its green paper on territorial cohesion, and to take account of the need to link coastal tourism to the integrated management of coastal zones and spatial planning for the seas;
Amendment 26 #
2008/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Expresses concern that the urban dimension is inadequately taken into account by some Member States in the implementation of the cohesion policy, and calls on the Commission and Member States in cooperation with regional and local authorities to analyse and evaluate the impact of mainstreaming the URBAN initiative and regularly to monitor and examine the application of EU funds in urban areas;
Amendment 50 #
2008/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Believes that only if sufficient resources are available for sustainable urban development will it be efficient to draw up integrated urban development plans and consequently recommends that available resources be concentrated on specific actions; proposes a minimum level of structural fund expenditure amounting to EUR 1.000 per inhabitant of the urban area per programming period;
Amendment 57 #
2008/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Recognises the difficulty for urban authorities in reconciling the domains of ESF whilst pursuing economic and social development and ERDF whilst planning physical infrastructure investments,; believes that the singl‘one programme, one fund’ principle should be abandoned and calls on the Commission to study the possibility of merging the two fundsreviewed;
Amendment 61 #
2008/2130(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Supports the idea of the revolving principle of JESSICA and its potential for economic growth in urban areas and believes that in the next programming period regional policy as a whole needs to be based substantially more on revolving funds offering credits than solely on grants as is the case at presentneeds also to be based on financial engineering;
Amendment 10 #
2008/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas one of the Union’s development aims is to modernise social structures, including employment structures,
Amendment 14 #
2008/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas economic, social and territorial cohesion of the EU can be enhanced by aligning both per-capita incomes and employment structures in rural and urban areas and ensuring equal access to public services,
Amendment 19 #
2008/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas it is of key importance to the EAFRD's success for the activities coming under this futo ensure mutual complementarity between activities co- financed under the EAFRD and to bhose complemented by Community- financed under the structural fundings, and thus for the assistance under the various funds, in particular the European Fund for Regional Development (ERDF), the Cohesion Fund (CF) and the European Social Fund (ESF), to be suitably coordinated and for the complementarity of those funds to be ensured,
Amendment 36 #
2008/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Takes the view that the criteria traditionally used to distinguish rural areas from urban areas (lower population density, different employment structure, lower level of income and worse access to public goods and services) fail to provide a complete picture of the situation; considers, therefore, that from the point of view of territorial cohesion, per-capita income, not lower population density, should be the decisive characteristicthe number of criteria should be increased;
Amendment 60 #
2008/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Notes with concern the lack of coordination between actions carried out and co-financed under the cohesion policy and those under the CAP II (development of rural areas) during the current programming period in the individual Member States;
Amendment 61 #
2008/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4b. Recalls that the Member States have been called upon to prepare, for the current programming period, two strategic documents: a National Strategy Plan for rural development (EAFRD) and a National Strategic Reference Framework for regional policy (Structural Funds); recalls that the Member States have been asked to mobilize synergies and set up operational coordination mechanisms between the various funds; regrets, however, that in this process the emphasis was mainly placed on ensuring the demarcation of the various funds and programmes, rather than creating synergies from them;
Amendment 62 #
2008/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
Paragraph 4 c (new)
4c. Is expecting the Commission to propose reforms aimed at ensuring better coordination in the planning and implementation of measures co-financed under the cohesion policy and CAP;
Amendment 63 #
2008/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 80 #
2008/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 123 #
2008/2100(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
Amendment 4 #
2008/2066(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Proposes that in the context of the Green Paper on EU territorial cohesion, to be published in autumn 2008, and in keeping with the objectives of the territorial agenda and the European Spatial Development Perspective (ESDP), the Commission should submit some specific measures to compensate for the handicappresent territorial approach to address the problems in different types of mountain regionterritories;
Amendment 25 #
2008/2066(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that sustainable, dynamic agriculture is necessary in mountain areas for maintaining other activities and for preserving populations;
Amendment 33 #
2008/2066(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Stresses the importance of ensuring a high level of services of general economic interest, and of improving accessibility and interconnection and of providing the necessary infrastructure.
Amendment 12 #
2008/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
Amendment 18 #
2008/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
Amendment 22 #
2008/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
Amendment 40 #
2008/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
Amendment 46 #
2008/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 49 #
2008/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
Amendment 77 #
2008/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
Amendment 98 #
2008/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
Amendment 124 #
2008/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
Amendment 127 #
2008/2064(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Calls on the elected representatives and the national, regional and local civil servants involved in managing operational programmes in the context of cohesion policy to use the financial resources available under these programmes for technical assistance to arrange training inmake preparations for the forms of governmentance linked to these programmes, in particular project management;
Amendment 16 #
2008/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital C - indent 4
Recital C - indent 4
Amendment 22 #
2008/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas many of the current shortcomingerrors in the field of cohesion policy can be traced back to the existing obstacles,
Amendment 28 #
2008/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)
Paragraph -1 (new)
-1. Welcomes the regulatory revision package to simplify Structural Fund procedures proposed by the Commission in response to the current financial crisis; eagerly awaits the further Commission proposals in this area which were due at the beginning of 2009;
Amendment 32 #
2008/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 − indents 4 a - 4 m (new)
Paragraph 1 − indents 4 a - 4 m (new)
Amendment 83 #
2008/2061(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 − indent 4 a (new)
Paragraph 12 − indent 4 a (new)
- employment of an integrated approach;
Amendment 24 #
2008/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Notes that the Commission has for the first time engaged in a systematic evaluation of the effectiveness of the 2000- 2006 operational programmes; awaits with great interest the results of this evaluation, which is a serious attempt to measure the effectiveness of cohesion policy actions; notes, however, that it is extremely difficult at this stage to fully appreciate the positive effects that cohesion policy has had in reality, as they full impact of the measures taken will not be discernable until later and cannot be measured in purely economic terms;
Amendment 29 #
2008/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Acknowledges that the current financial crisis has significantly changed the economic and financial situation in many Member States; notes that, as a result of this crisis, national investment priorities may change and, for that reason, several operational programmes might need to be adapted; underlines the fact that Member States may also face liquidity problems that prevent them from ensuring the payment of national contributions towards the implementation of structural actions and programmes; urges the Commission to work closely with the Member States in a joint efwelcomes, accordingly, the Commission's proposed changes to the existing legislative framework for the Structural Funds 2007-2013 and its willingness to extend the deadline fort to re-launch the European economy; also callhe settlement of the accounts for programmes cofinanced under the Structural Funds oin the Commission to propose changes to the existing legislative framework for the Structural Funds 2007- 2013, where necessar2000-2006 programming period; urges the Commission to work closely with the Member States in a joint effort to re- launch the European economy;
Amendment 31 #
2008/2055(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. In the context of territorial cohesion, recommends significant reinforcement of the European Territorial Cooperation Objective in both policy and financial terms and suggests that extra funding be ensured for the next programming period; welcomes the Commission's recent efforts to strengthen territorial cooperation by creating trans-national cooperation structures for countries that face similar problems; notes with great interest the Baltic Sea strategy, which shows that similar strategies might also be considered for other regionstypes of territorial unit in the future;
Amendment 1 #
2008/2026(BUD)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Expresses concern at the considerable reduction in structural fund payment appropriations compared with 2008, and looks to the Commission to carry out a fresh analysis of the basic situation;
Amendment 15 #
2008/2007(INI)
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines the need to involve port and local authorities in drawing up plans to manage the water quality of river basins and maritime ports; draws attention to the need for regional authorities to ensure thatsupport the efforts to reduce CO2 emissions from ships and other modes of transport on land reduce their CO2 emissions into the air.
Amendment 6 #
2007/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
Amendment 39 #
2007/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses that the territorial concentration of vulnerable communities and groups and the strong geographic influence affecting social segregation in the most underdeveloped territories is an increasing challenge for the cohesion of EU territories;
Amendment 54 #
2007/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Emphasises in this connection that horizontal actions are not sufficient to overcome the problems of territorial exclusion and recommends thereforeRecommends that the Member States apply a holistic territorial development strategy, putting the cross-sector integrated approach into practice and focusing on the potential of these territories while also taking into consideration their geographical handicaps;
Amendment 61 #
2007/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 86 #
2007/2191(INI)
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11