38 Amendments of Joachim ZELLER related to 2011/2035(INI)

Seán KELLY, Alain CADEC, Joachim ZELLER

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas the completely free movement of goods, services and workers is the most effective regional policy and tends in itself to help smooth out regional disparities in development,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Recognises, too, that European funding adds value where projects supported at regional level contribute to the achievement of pan-European objectives in the fields of economic growth, research, environmental protection, resource management, sport, demographic change, energy supply sustainability, social cohesion or cross-border development and this would not have been realised without the European stimulus;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses that larger urban centres face specific challenges because of the complexity of their social, economic and environmental tasks;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Jan OLBRYCHT, Joachim ZELLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Emphasises that the Union will be able to hold its own in the face of global competition only if its cohesion policy can tap the development potential of all the regions in response to the challenges of the EU 2020 strategy; underlines in this connection that targeting Structural Fund resources in a broad territorial approach must also serve to compensate for structural weaknesses in the stronger regions too, as well as to counteract potential weaknesses;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Emphasises that the Union will be able to hold its own in the face of global competition only if its cohesion policy can tap the development potential of all the regions and cities in response to the challenges of the EU 2020 strategy;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Jan OLBRYCHT, Joachim ZELLER, Lena KOLARSKA-BOBIŃSKA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Sees macroregional strategies as affording a major opportunity to harness forms of trans-regional potential and adopt a joint approach to challenges stemming from the natural environment, e.g. in relation to environmental protection; considers that better coordination of existing support mechanisms can create scope for more targeted use of the EU structural funds; nevertheless, no new instruments, financial resources or implementation structures should be created for these strategies;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Doubts whether specific operational programmes for functional geographical entities such as ~~metropolitan regions or~~ sea or river basins will yield additional benefits; is particularly aware, in relation to such programmes, of the absence of political bodies (including democratically elected bodies) with a sufficiently wide- ranging remit to implement them; calls instead for closer coordination of macroregional or natural- environment strategies at inter- governmental levels;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Joachim ZELLER, Seán KELLY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses the key role ~~of towns and citie~~cities and regions in achieving the economic, environmental and social EU 2020 objectives; calls for support for ideas and projects which can serve as models, on the basis of integrated place-based development plans, and for the upgrading of urban-rural links; underlines that the greatest socioeconomic differences often exist within cities and that cities with deprived areas and pockets of poverty can also be found in wealthy regions;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Sabine VERHEYEN, Hermann WINKLER, Joachim ZELLER, Petru Constantin LUHAN, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Calls on the Commission to oblige the Member States to involve the relevant actors in key urban areas as well as local and regional authorities in all phases of cohesion policy decisions (strategic planning, drawing up and negotiating development and investment partnership agreements, and operational programmes);

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Also considers that cohesion policy has a responsibility to do what is needed to fill gaps and remove bottlenecks in a core TEN network of main routes of European significance, particularly in the border regions which have until now been badly neglected in this regard;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Tamás DEUTSCH, Sabine VERHEYEN, Joachim ZELLER, Hermann WINKLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Emphasises that the trans-European transport networks play a decisive role in European regional cohesion and that development of TEN infrastructure, Motorways of the Sea and designated E- roads must therefore be stepped up and access to them improved, especially in border regions~~; suggests that ‘infrastructure’ be accorded more importance as a category of project eligible for support in connec~~ and outermost regions,; suggests that certain crossborder ‘infrastructure’ shall be considered as priority projects eligible to funds of the objective 1, 2 and 3 calls for a obligatory right to make the first proposal of the regional level for this type of action and equal participation ~~with~~of the ~~third objective of European Territorial Cooperation;~~ border regions and local authorities in the planning;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Takes the view that the development of basic infrastructure and support for conventional forms of energy should also be regarded as compatible with EU 2020, because only when they have competitive transport, energy and communications networks and waste-disposal infrastructure will the convergence regions be in a position to contribute to achieving the EU 2020 objectives – and that is precisely why the weaker and neediest regions must be given some leeway to interpret those objectives; in this connection, welcomes the greater use of innovative funding solutions such as EU project loans or public-private partnerships and other services offered by the EIB/EIF group;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for a dependable and appropriate phasing-out arrangement under the Convergence objective for areas ~~former~~currently eligible for ~~maximum~~ support under the Convergence objective ~~(con~~with a GDP per inhabitant that is more than 75% of the EU average~~nce regions)~~; without such phasing out, existing successful approaches to further regional development would be greatly jeopardised;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Sabine VERHEYEN, Petru Constantin LUHAN, Joachim ZELLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. In addition, calls for a time-limited safety net for cases where the loss of support in a Member State affects a large proportion of its population and also a significant part of the support within the previous programming period; sees a particular justification for an appropriate phasing out system for regions leaving the convergence support system, which despite having exceeded the 75% threshold face growing disadvantages (demographic change, migratory deficit, monolithic structure, unemployment, etc.)

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Erminia MAZZONI, Sabine VERHEYEN, Joachim ZELLER, Richard SEEBER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls for a strengthening of Objective 2 (Regional Competitiveness and Employment), which is based on a cross- cutting approach~~, to be upgraded; stresses that the proven system of innovation clusters and competition for funding needs to be developed further~~; stresses for Objective 2 regions that the proven system of ensuring that more developed regions are able to remove regional structural weaknesses; reduce territorial disparities; contribute to common European objectives; and to meet future challenges, when using structures that can respond flexible to changing circumstance, including, inter alia, innovation clusters and competition for funding, must be retained and developed further; calls for additional instruments for areas highly affected by structural change, which can contribute to the socio-economic and infrastructural improvement;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Fears that the transitional category proposed by the Commission will become a permanent feature and will act to the detriment of other regions; calls, therefore, for the transitional rules to be degressive, subject to a time limit and restricted to regions currently eligible for support under the 'convergence' objective;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Sabine VERHEYEN, Joachim ZELLER, Hermann WINKLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Takes the unequivocal view that efforts under Objective 3 (European Territorial Cooperation) need to be stepped up at all EU internal borders and at all three levels of such cooperation (cross-border, inter- regional and trans-national) and calls for the relevant share of the structural funds to be increased to 710%; stresses the importance of the border regions in terms of achievement of the EU 2020 objectives; considers there is a need for closer linkage with the TEN networks – in line with European priorities – and with cross-border infrastructure, and calls for a corresponding increase in funding for all border regions;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)

27a. Calls for the sake of increasing synergies for a greater integration of sectoral policies (transport, energy, research, environment, education) in the cohesion and structural policy creating more effectiveness and better coordination between the Structural Funds, the CIP and the Framework Programmes for Research and Development, suggests that multi-fund programming could contribute to work in a more integrated manner and would increase the effectiveness between these different funds; considers the national / regional development partnerships as an appropriate instrument to bring together the various policies; in this respect underlines the need to set clear objectives and to assess whether the goals were achieved in the Member States;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Joachim ZELLER, Tamás DEUTSCH, Sabine VERHEYEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls for the mandatory involvement of ~~federal Länder and regions~~regional and local authorities, in accordance with constitutional and institutional set up of Member States, in drawing up development partnerships and operational programmes; considers it essential to make appropriate provision for this in the regulations governing the Structural Funds;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Hermann WINKLER, Sabine VERHEYEN, Joachim ZELLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36

36. Calls for delays in launching programmes to be avoided and for decision-making and evaluation processes to be expedited as a matter of course; stresses that this is extremely important for small and medium-sized undertakings in particular; calls, too, for the technical equipment available to the relevant administrative authorities to be improved and for them to be more closely networked, for disclosure requirements to be reduced, and for a significant shortening of deadlines for putting the necessary expert reports out to tender and for their delivery;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 a (new)

37a. Supports the Commission's call for the macroeconomic conditionality linked to budgetary discipline to apply not only to the Cohesion Fund but to be extended to other structural and agricultural funds as well;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Sabine VERHEYEN, Joachim ZELLER, Hermann WINKLER, Petru Constantin LUHAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37 b (new)

37b. Considers the Commission to be responsible for formulating conditionalities and overseeing their implementation, and proposes corresponding action plans for the Member States and regions;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)

40a. Calls on the Member States and regions to look ahead when programming co-financing appropriations and to boost them by means of financial engineering;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Jan OLBRYCHT, Joachim ZELLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Calls, in the case of direct subsidies to undertakings, for it to be recognised that Cohesion Policy funding, rather than influencing decisions by companies – and particularly bigger companies – to open a plant in a given location, tends to be pocketed by companies which have already taken such decisions (deadweight effect), and calls, therefore, for support for large undertakings to focus on investment in research and development or for it to be provided, in more cases, indirectly through infrastructure financing; also calls for clear provisions to be included in the general regulation governing the Structural Funds ruling out EU support for the relocation of undertakings within the Union, and for a substantial lowering of the threshold for review of relocation investments;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 43

43. Recognises the leverage effect of new financial instruments and their potential to mobilise investment, supports increased financing from credit in principle, and calls for the use of revolving financial instruments to be extended to more areas eligible for funding (including research and infrastructure); calls for procedures to be simplified to that end and for a greater degree of legal certainty throughout the entire funding period; takes the view that at the end of a funding period, at the latest, responsibility for how the funds are spent should transfer to national level or project level; under the current period, not all member states adopted a decentralised approach to dealing with financial instruments such as JESSICA; emphasises the need for direct access for cities.

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Jan OLBRYCHT, Joachim ZELLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 46

46. Sees global grants at subregional level as an appropriate tool for developing independent innovation strategies in line with European structural-policy objectives; ~~proposes that the tried and tested approach of competitive procedures should also be applied in respect of global grants;~~

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53

53. Envisages that the Commission will, in future, have a greater responsibility for the improvement of national administrative procedures; considers in this connection that simplification and clarification in the administration of support programmes, in particular in the area of financial implementation and financial control, are urgently necessary; takes the view, therefore, that it will be incumbent on the Commission to implement accreditation procedures for national or federal-state administrative and auditing bodies; envisages linkage between, on the one hand, successful accreditation and a reduction in the error rate and, on the other, entitlement to simplified and less frequent reporting;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Sabine VERHEYEN, Joachim ZELLER, Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Markus PIEPER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53 b (new)

53b. Calls for significantly stricter standards for budgetary control and proof of compliance with funding rules to be applied to Member States whose auditing bodies do not pass the accreditation procedures;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54 a (new)

54a. Calls on the Commission to maintain an annual public 'failure scoreboard' of inadequate and/or late execution of reporting and disclosure requirements and of irregularities, abuse and fraud in the use of monies from the cohesion fund; calls for this information to be broken down by Member State and Fund;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Sabine VERHEYEN, Joachim ZELLER, Ingeborg GRÄSSLE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54 c (new)

54c. Calls for annual clearance of accounts procedures to be established for the new programming period that also cover multiannual programmes;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Sabine VERHEYEN, Joachim ZELLER, Ingeborg GRÄSSLE, Petru Constantin LUHAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54 d (new)

54d. Considers more efficient e- government solutions (harmonised forms) to be necessary for the entire implementation and monitoring system; calls for exchange of experience between the Member States coordinated by the Commission and for coordinated implementation through groupings of administrative authorities and auditing bodies;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54 e (new)

54e. Considers that the transparency provisions (obligation to disclose the final beneficiary) are a necessary instrument for experts, the public and policy-makers to evaluate the conformity with objectives and the legality with which the structural funds have been used; Calls for the description to be supplied not only in the relevant national language but also in one of the three working languages (English, French or German) and recommends further harmonisation of the information required;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI