13 Amendments of Victor BOŞTINARU related to 2017/2279(INI)
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument, with a budget; underlines that a budget comparable to the one for the 2014-2020 wouldn't allow to cope with the new challenges; calls therefore for the budget for the new programming period to be commensurate with the old and new challenges;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are laggfalling behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considerspoints out that cohesion policy could contribute to theis geared to promotion ofng social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives, economic and territorial convergence; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that infrastructure, employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another; considers that the ESI Funds should continue to be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement; in this regard, underlines the importance of continuing support for the energy efficiency and the use of renewable energy in buildings, as this represents a sector which can substantially help both in terms of reducing carbon emissions and increasing the use of renewable energy; insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible;
Amendment 216 #
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 for the purpose of allocating fundsGDP should continue to be the eligibility criterion to determine the national allocation; believes that additional indicators could be used at regional and sub-regional level, 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 rate;
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Emphasises that grants should remain the main cohesion policy funding instrument, but acknowledges that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Believes that it is both legitimate and necessary to establish a link between cohesion policy and the guarantee of an environment conducive to investment, effectiveness and the proper use of funds, while stressing that cohesion policy is not meant to be reduced to an instrument for serving priorities without reference to its objectives; expresses its support for a balanced link with economic governance where this helps to maximrules out any link between the ESI Funds and economic governance that might lead to the consequence of commitments or payments being suspended despite of the regularity of the action taken by beneficiaries; emphasises the impact of ESI Fundsat such situations necessarily jeopardise the very essence and objectives of the ESI Funds and significantly weaken their impact on the ground; calls on the Commission to overhaul the European Semester to strengthen its territorial dimension and take account of other factors which contribute to the achievement of cohesion objectives, such as real convergence;
Amendment 257 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued, 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 withvise and rationalise the conditionality mechanism, applying the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity more strictly, making maximum use of existing strategic documents and selecting ex ante conditionalities which have a direct bearing on the effectiveness of the investments;
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Notes that the quality and the stability of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase the administrative capacitiy of those who deal with ESI- funded projects at national, regional and local level; believes in the necessity for them to be incentivized, so that they remain in their post for a long period of time and ensure the completion of projects which are by definition long-term ones;
Amendment 306 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33
Paragraph 33
33. Calls for requirements in respect of the programming, implementation and monitoring of ESI Funds in future to be based on the principle of differentiationproportionality, in accordance with the amounts allocated to programmes, the risk profile, the quality of administration and the level of financing by recipients;
Amendment 308 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34
Paragraph 34
34. Regards it as essential that the relationship between the Commission and managing authorities should evolve towards a ‘contract of confidence’; calls on the Commission to build on the work already done in the area of sound public finance management, introducing the principle of a new label to reward managing authorities which have demonstrated their ability to comply with the rules; in relation to monitoring, calls for greater reliance on national and regional rules where their effectiveness has been verified and validated;
Amendment 320 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Is concerned at the Commission’s recent statements concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude certain regions from the scope of cohesion policy; wishes to see a budget commensurate with the institutional goals of Cohesion Policy and with the challenges facing the regions, and calls for cohesion policy not to be made an adjustment variable; points out that the coverage of all EU regions is a ‘red line’ for the European Parliament; stresses that the theory of ‘economic development clubs’ confirms the importance of differentiated support for all European regions, including regions with a very high income, which must remain competitive with their global competitors;
Amendment 346 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40
Paragraph 40
40. Calls for every effort to be made to avoid delays in programming for the new period; stresses the importance of submitting all documents relating to the future legal framework on time in all the official languages and of simplifying the formalities which managing authorities must complete before they can start the programming process (e.g. ex-ante conditionality, designation of the managing authority itself);