6 Amendments of Tatjana ŽDANOKA related to 2015/2224(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Highlights the potential of cohesion policy to improve employment opportunities and growth, thereby, sustainable growth and to contributinge to poverty reduction and social inclusion; Points out in this regard the importance of integrated funding, and especially the combination of ESF and ERDF;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the Commission’s vision of CLLD and ITI as instruments and delivery mechanisms for empowering local communities and developing local economy and social entrepreneurship as well as instruments designed for smooth and efficient spending of the available funds by local actors; Underlines that targeted capacity building is necessary to facilitate the pooling of funds from different resources;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Regrets the absence of a more recognisable branding for CLLD and ITI and encourages the Commission and the Member States to make both tools mandatory and as visible and understandable as possible for their users, while avoiding any additional unnecessary bureaucratic burden;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Calls on the Commission to create channels of communication with Member States and local agents and points out that CLLD and ITI will only achieve success with the commitment and ownership of all the stakeholders involved, including civil society; considers that the involvement of partners can also strengthen the integrated and place-based approach, in particular where take-up of CLLD and ITI is low;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. NotStresses the potential of the bottom-up approach of CLLD in creating job opportunities and encouraging sustainable rural development, and would welcome the inclusion of urban areas in this mechanism;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission, in view of the limited use of the European Social Fund within the method in question and the absence of a centralised managing authoritylack of experience in most Member States, to use the mid-term review of the MFF to address the difficulties that have already been identified in the application of the instruments and to find sustainable solutions;