19 Amendments of Hermann WINKLER related to 2011/2035(INI)
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
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;
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Stresses the key role of towns and cities 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 development plans, and for the upgrading of urban-rural links; stresses, however, that this should not be achieved at the expense of the countryside;
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Emphasises that support from the cohesion and structural funds must be more strongly oriented towards the educational and socio-political challenges of the EU 2020 strategy; takes the view, however, that across-the-board ‘Europeanisation’ of the relevant policy areas would be a doomed endeavour purely on financial grounds; calls, therefore, for the further development of approaches that could serve as models, while retaining existing national and regional competences and a specific regional policy link; in this connection, calls for greater involvement of training providers from the business world;
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Calls, in the light of the necessary shift towards renewable sources of energy and of the climate debate, for cohesion policy to make a greater contribution to the rapid development of renewables; in that connection, supports the plans for decentralised energy strategies involving effective energy storage technologies in the regions; supports involving the regional economy’s potential in this area;
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
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;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
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 withof the third objective of European Territorial Cooperation; border regions and local authorities in the planning;
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
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;
Amendment 261 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. Calls for a dependable and appropriate phasing-out arrangement under the Convergence objective for areas formercurrently eligible for maximum support under the Convergence objective (conwith a GDP per inhabitant that is more than 75% of the EU averagence regions); without such phasing out, existing successful approaches to further regional development would be greatly jeopardised;
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
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.)
Amendment 320 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
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;
Amendment 329 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29
Paragraph 29
29. Suggests, in this context, that reintegration of the regionally oriented EAFRD (Axes 3 and 4) programmes be considered, and calls for binding targets to be set for the Member States and the regions in order to establish more standardised arrangements for administering the EU structural funds and the regionally oriented rural development programme harmonising the rules governing the funds embedded in the common strategy framework; considers that account should be taken of specific regional conditions when harmonising administrative arrangements;
Amendment 375 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 35
Paragraph 35
35. Calls, in the event that binding priorities are set for all Member States, for these to cover innovation, infrastructure and resource management and to be tailored in each case to regions’ specific needs; stresses in this connection that innovation must be given a broad interpretation in line with the Innovation Union flagship initiative; stresses that it must be possible to suggest and pursue additional priorities on a voluntary basis and in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity; calls for suggested priority areas to include energy, education and training, and combating poverty; demographic change;
Amendment 388 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
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;
Amendment 429 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)
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;
Amendment 449 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42
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;
Amendment 522 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54
Paragraph 54
54. Calls, in the interests of reducing red tape, for the more general application of standardised procedures, with higher standardised units of cost and declaration of overheads on a flat-rate basis; calls for greater account to be taken of the principle of proportionality, i.e. for the implementation of smaller programmes to be subject to significantly reduced reporting and auditing requirements; calls for account to be taken of the major significance for regional development of small and medium-sized undertakings, and of their needs particularly in connection with the implementation and control procedures;
Amendment 537 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55 b (new)
Paragraph 55 b (new)
55b. Considers the offsetting of improperly received monies that have not been paid back against current funding pledges to be an effective instrument for disciplining Member States with a poor record;
Amendment 538 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55 c (new)
Paragraph 55 c (new)
55c. Calls for diversification of the penalty mechanisms, including among other aspects a bonus system for those Member States which comply with the implementation requirements, in particular through administrative concessions;
Amendment 545 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
56. Supports the Commission’s proposal that the N+2 rule should be applied systematically except in the first year of funding and except for cross-border programmes and that derogations from it should be abolished; supports, indeed, the application of an N+3 rule in the case of cross-border programmes, in order to take account of the slower administrative processes resulting from the linguistic and cultural challenges they face; considers this will guarantee that a balance is struck between high- quality investment and smooth and speedy programme implementation;