Activities of Oldřich VLASÁK related to 2010/2211(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION Policy challenges and budgetary resources for a sustainable European Union after 2013
Amendments (12)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Points to the increased importance of cohesion policy following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, and to the fact that a third pillar – territorial cohesion – has been added to it, and notes that the regionMember States, the regions and cities are best placed to implement that policy on an active basis and that sectoralisation is therefore counterproductive;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Takes the view that cohesion policy is an important componentbut not the only tool for the implementation of the EU 2020 strategy and that a sound cohesion policy is the prerequisite for successful joint action by the EU as it contributes to a better ownership of EU2020 objectives at regional and local level and allows for a consolidation of strategic goals and local needs with potential on the ground; emphasises that objectives that are included in the Lisbon Treaty but are not part of EU2020 goals should also be achieved and the relationship between the objectives of the EU2020 Strategy and other objectives should be clarified;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that cohesion policy, which accounts for the largest individual budget, has been one of the EU's most significant and most successful policies for decades; believes that cohesion policy should have its heading or subheading within the EU budget;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – introductory part
Paragraph 5 – introductory part
5. Points out that a modern cohesion policy must take on the remaining needs of structural reforms and the new challenges facing all the EU; regions; considers it is therefore necessary to set priorities:
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 3 – introductory part
Paragraph 5 – indent 3 – introductory part
– we stress the need, within cohesion policy, for increased support for pro- growth measures and qualitative update of public goods and services such as:
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 3 – point i a (new)
Paragraph 5 – indent 3 – point i a (new)
(i a) development of smart physical infrastructure,
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 – indent 3 – point i
Paragraph 5 – indent 3 – point i
(i) ICT deployment, research, development and innovation,
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Endorses the view that that the ESF must remain an integral component of cohesion policy and be strengthenedthat operational integration should exist between the ERDF and the ESF, their resources should be used in a more coordinated manner in order to allow for integrated and more effective delivery; calls for greater coordination with cohesion policy measures so that rural regions can be properly involved and resources used more efficiently;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Insists, in keeping with a spirit of solidarity, on largely targeting the support to less developed regions; furthermore on specific support for the EU- 27‘'s most disadvantaged regions; stresses, at the same time, the need for a powerful Objective 2 and sound transitional rules;
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Points out that funds must be spent transparently and efficiently in the regions, cities and municipalities, on the basis of rules that are as simple as possible and sound management with a strong decentralised strand derived from political accountability of local and regional self- governing authorities;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Insists that, in future, expenditure control should be streamlined and more result-oriented in order not to put excessive administrative burden on final beneficiaries;
Amendment 100 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18