9 Amendments of Jean-Paul DENANOT related to 2014/2245(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the fact that over recent years cohesion policy has proven its ability to mitigate the negative impact of the economic and financial crisis on public investment levels in the Member States; inter alia by reducing national co- financing requirements and redirecting a significant part of cohesion funds towards measures with a direct and immediate effect on growth and job creation; underlines the positive contribution that other policies and instruments beyond the field of cohesion make towards achieving the objectives of the Europe 2020 strategy; is confident that, due to the usual time lag between action and impact and the fact that funds from the 2007- 2013 period may still be used until the end of 2016, these beneficial effects will continue to grow over the next few years;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Recalls that the issue of the persistent payments backlog concerns cohesion policy more than any other EU policy area; encourages the Commission to use all available means to cover these outstanding payment bills with EUR 24.8 billion of unpaid payment bills at the end of 2014 for ESF, ERDF and CF 2007-2013 programmes, i.e. a 5.6% increase over 2013; encourages the Commission to use all available means to cover these outstanding payment bills; underlines that this situation hits first and foremost the smallest and most vulnerable beneficiaries of cohesion policy, such as SMEs, NGOs and associations, as their capacity to pre- finance expenditure is limited;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the fact that the Council, the Commission and Parliament have arrived at an agreement to reduce the level of unpaid bills particularly in cohesion policy, to a sustainable level, as laid down in the joint statement accompanying the 2015 budgetary agreement, and looks forward to receiving the Commission’s proposal for a payment plan as soon as possible, and in any event before the presentation of the 2016 draft budget; furthermore, reminds all institutions of their commitment to agree on and implement such a plan as of 2015 and by the mid-term revision of the current MFF;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Is concerned about the serious delays at the start of 2015 in the programming process for the period 2014-2020 in this area; underlines the fact that the proposed revision of the MFF ceilings[1] transferring EUR 11.2 billion in commitments for the total heading 1b under Article 19(2) of the MFF Regulation and the carry-over[2] of EUR 8.5 billion in commitments under Article 13(2)(a) of the Financial Regulation from 2014 to 2015 avoid cancelling these appropriations in heading 1b, but neither genuinely address the underlying problem of the delays in programming nor change the fact that chronically delayed implementation and systematic late payment can pose significant challenges to final beneficiaries; [1] Proposal for a Council Regulation amending Regulation (EU, Euratom) No 1311/2013 laying down the multiannual financial framework for the years 2014- 2020, COM(2015) 15 final, 21.01.2015. [2] Commission Decision on non- automatic carryover from 2014 to 2015 and commitment appropriations to be made available again in 2015, C(2015) 827 final, 11.02.2015.
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes the extended use in cohesion policy of financial instruments, such as loans and guarantees, to support investment; encourages Member States and regional authorities to make full use of these additional financing opportunities, such as the possibility of using guarantees under the new SME Initiative to cover higher-risk projects;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Takes note of the stronger concentration of resources on a limited number of priorities and the enhanced focus on results and measurability in 2014-2020 programmes, which should contribute to further increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of cohesion policy ; underlines, nonetheless, the need to apply this principle flexibly, with full respect for territorial, economic and social specificities;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Concords with the Commission’s analysis that economic and social priorities, in particular a focus on economic growth on the one hand and social inclusion, education and sustainable development on the other, could be better balanced in some Member States, underpinned by a meaningful dialogue with partners and stakeholders; emphasises that a clear strategy for improving Member States’ institutional framework in terms of administrative capacity and quality of justice is a key determining factor for success in achieving these priorities;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Reiterates its strong criticism of the measures linking the effectiveness of the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) to sound economic governance and therefore requests the Commission not to apply them ; requests the Commission to take into account the different baseline conditions in each Member State and varying degrees of effort needed to meet pre-conditions and to take particular care neither to disadvantage those regions that are most in need nor to punish certain local and regional authorities for specific challenges encountered at national level;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Reiterates its deep conviction that a genuine revision of the multiannual financial framework (MFF) by 2016, at the latest, would be the ideal opportunity to revisit the MFF Regulation to make sure that it addresseccurately reflects the Union’s priorities and addresses the most urgent needs in the Member States and regions in the remaining years of the MFF, as well as the persistent problem of payment appropriations and the possible impact on payments of the delayed implementation of operational programmes in the area of cohesion policy.