28 Amendments of Nessa CHILDERS related to 2017/2040(INI)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Notes that macro regional strategies are being consistently integrated into policy planning at EU level, but more sporadically at national and regional level;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1b. Calls on the Commission and participating countries and their regions to further integrate macro-regional strategies into EU sectorial policies, and to develop synergies between them, thereby facilitating the implementation of sectorial policies in an integrated way across territories;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Encourages the expansion of conservation areas to protect the environment and halt biodiversity loss, particularly through the enhancement of the Natura 2000 and Emerald networks, as well as the LIFE programme;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls for the timely adoption of maritime spatial planning and integrated coastal management strategies by the EU Member States, as well as coastal candidate and potential candidate countries;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)
Paragraph 2 c (new)
2c. Calls for the enhancement of a marine NATURA 2000 network, and a coherent and representative network of Marine Protected Areas under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive by 2020;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Points out that the Adriatic Sea, due to its semi-enclosed nature, is especially vulnerable to pollution and has unusual hydrographic features; its depth and the length of its coastline vary considerably between the north and south of the region;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that third countries involved in projects in the macro-region comply with the relevant Union acquis, in order to guarantee the sustainable exploitation of the Union's resources; in particular the Marine Strategy Framework, the Water Framework, Urban Waste Water, Nitrates, Waste, Birds and Habitats Directives as well the Green Infrastructure Strategy; recommends that agreements and conventions be used to involve countries outside the EU in European Union environmental projects;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 c (new)
Paragraph 5 c (new)
5c. Points out that the rich biodiversity of the Adriatic-Ionian (Region), marine sub-region is a major draw for tourism, recreational and fishing activities, and contributes to the cultural heritage of the macro-region; therefore, considers the lack of habitat maps unfortunate; calls on the participant countries to undertake mapping actions within the framework of the EUSAIR;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 d (new)
Paragraph 5 d (new)
5d. Emphasises that an ecosystem- based approach to the coordination of activities is needed within the framework of Integrated Coastal Management (ICM) and Marine Spatial Planning (MSP), in order to ensure the sustainable use of resources, as both frameworks are important stimulants for trans-boundary collaboration and stakeholder cooperation across different coastal and maritime sector activities, and have the potential to bring together ecosystem services and Blue Growth opportunities in a sustainable way;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 e (new)
Paragraph 5 e (new)
5e. Calls for the establishment of a coordinated monitoring system and database on marine litter and marine pollution, including the identification of sources and types of litter and pollution, as well as a geographic information system (GIS) database on the location and sources of marine litter;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 f (new)
Paragraph 5 f (new)
5f. Calls for the drafting and implementation of a joint contingency plan for oil spills and other large-scale pollution events, building on the work of the sub-regional contingency plan developed by the Joint Commission for the protection of the Adriatic Sea and coastal areas, and the Barcelona Convention protocols;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 g (new)
Paragraph 5 g (new)
5g. Calls on the countries involved to give priority to capacity-building directed at the EUSAIR key implementers, as well as at programme authorities responsible for EUSAIR relevant operational programmes;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Notes with appreciation the implementation of projects such as DANUBEPARKS 2.0, STURGEON 2020, SEERISK, CC-WARE and the Danube Air Nexus cluster in reaching the EUSDR environmental goals;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 b (new)
Paragraph 6 b (new)
6b. Welcomes the setting up of the Interreg Danube Transnational Programme as a tool for providing support to its governance, and highlights its direct contribution to the Strategy's implementation as being one of the most visible results of the EUSDR;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 c (new)
Paragraph 6 c (new)
6c. Welcomes the setting up of the Danube Strategy Point as a new body for facilitating the implementation of the EUSDR, and encourages the involvement of all concerned parties and potentially interested actors;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 d (new)
Paragraph 6 d (new)
6d. Notes with concern that, compared to the first years of its activity, the EUSDR now seems to have been given a lower priority slot in the political narrative at national level in those countries involved; emphasises the need to maintain the political momentum since the commitment by countries directly affects the availability of human resources in the national and regional administrations, and this is crucial for the smooth functioning of the strategy, and for working towards a consolidation of the progress made and results achieved so far;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 e (new)
Paragraph 6 e (new)
6e. Calls on the participant countries to ensure an adequate participation of national representatives in EUSDR Steering Group meetings on priority areas, and to consider reducing the number and scope of current priority areas if sufficient resources are not allocated within well-defined timeframes;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 f (new)
Paragraph 6 f (new)
6f. Highlight the issue of numerous sunken ships in the Danube that present a navigational and ecological danger, especially where water levels are low; points out that sunken wrecks contain appreciable amounts of fuel and other substances that pollute water constantly, while the rusting metal of the ships generates pollution on a continuous basis with serious repercussions; calls for the mobilisation of EU funds for tackling this problem and greater co-operation in the framework of the EUSDR;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls on the stakeholders of the Alpine macro-region to use European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds) and other Union funding to promote environment-related investments that have climate change mitigation and adaptation among their objectives;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Underlines that environmental policy is of a cross-cutting nature and that the favoured options in Alpine strategy fields must reconcile environmental sustainability and economic development; whereas climate change mitigation and biodiversity preservation policies include the need to reinforce the resilience of ecosystems with enough habitat connectivity to allow species migration;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Is concerned that climate change can give rise to hydrogeological instability and threaten biodiversity in the Alpine Region; underlines that rising temperatures are a serious threat to the survival of species' populations living at high altitudes, and that the melting of glaciers is a further cause for concern, as it has a major impact on groundwater reserves;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Considers it essential to pursue climate change policies encompassing production and consumption patterns that are in line with the circular economy principles and shorter cycles in the food supply chain, and to place the emphasis on the rational use and reuse of local materials and natural resources, including wastewater and agricultural waste, and on the sharing of services encouraged by green public procurement, and fostering close links between producers and consumers at local level;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 d (new)
Paragraph 7 d (new)
7d. Notes that the first steps in the implementation of the EUSALP strategy have shown that its integration into the existing programmes has proven difficult, as they are governed by structures, frameworks and timeframes which are often incompatible with the needs of a macro-regional strategy;
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 e (new)
Paragraph 7 e (new)
7e. Calls on the participant countries to reinforce their commitment, continuity, stability, empowerment and support to the EUSALP Action Group members who will represent them, and to make sure that all Action Groups are adequately represented;
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Points out that the environmental state of the Baltic Sea has remained the main focus of the EUSBSR since its launch in 2009;
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 b (new)
Paragraph 8 b (new)
8b. Notes that achieving a good environmental status by 2020 is one of the key objectives of policy actions in the Baltic Sea Region;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 c (new)
Paragraph 8 c (new)
8c. Calls on all stakeholders to organise more frequent and regular political discussions on the EUSBSR at national level within the Parliament or Government, and also within the Council at the relevant Ministerial meetings;
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 d (new)
Paragraph 8 d (new)
8d. Notes that the EUSBSR is a stable cooperation framework with more than 100 flagship initiatives and new networks; nevertheless, urges stakeholders to maintain its momentum and to improve policy coordination and content by building on project results;