Activities of Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID related to 2009/2231(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Territorial, social and economic cohesion - Good governance and EU regional policy (debate)
Amendments (7)
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital Ca (new)
Recital Ca (new)
Ca. whereas funding application procedures that are too complicated and an excessive number of checks are likely to discourage potential beneficiaries of cohesion policy,
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses that multi-level governance allows better exploitation of the potential of territorial cooperation thanks to the relations developed among private and public actors across borders; urges those Member States which have not yet done so to adopt as soon as possible the necessary provisions allowing the setting up of European Groupings ofor Territorial Cooperation; recommends that the Commission promote exchange of information between the EGTCs already created and those in the process of being set up; congratulates the Committee of the Regions on the quality of its work on EGTCs and welcomes the provision of information on them through the EGTC Internet portal;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls on the Member States also to strengthen, where appropriate, the role of regional and local authorities in programme management and implementation, w and to build up the re appropriatesources at their disposal; recommends the adoption in the cohesion policy of the local development methodology based on local partnerships, in particular for projects related to urban, rural and cross-border issues;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Calls on the Commission to create a training and mobility schysteme for local and regional actors involved in running cohesion policy programmes, in order to raise the standard of proposed projects and meet the cohesion policy’s objective of efficiency;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Is convinced that compliance with the procedures cannot be at the expense of the quality of interventions; asks the Commission for a more result-oriented policy in the future, focused on quality performance and strategic project development rather than on controls; to this end, urges the Commission to develop objective and measurable indicators which are comparable across the Union and to give further consideration to the need for flexible rules in the event of economic crises;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20
Paragraph 20
20. Welcomes the ongoing simplification of the Financial Regulation and the Structural Funds regulations; calls for a simpler architecture for the Funds after 2013, not as a consequence of the economic crisis but as a general principle of the future cohesion policy, in order to avoid discouraging potential partners from taking part in projects; recommends that greater transparency in respect of the use of the EU Funds should not lead to a disproportionately increased administrative burden;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls on the Commission to take on board the principles of differentiation and proportionality in future regulations and to adapt requirements according to the size of programmes and nature of partners, especially when small public authorities are involved; asks for wider use of lump- sums and flat rates for all Funds, in particular for overheads and technical assistance; proposes that provision be made for more flexible evaluation criteria for innovative projects and softer control requirements for pilot projects; encourages the Commission to develop the principle of a ‘bond of trust’ with the Member States undertaking to and succeeding in making good use of the Funds;