7 Amendments of Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA related to 2011/2312(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the Commission's proposals to place a results-led approach at the heart of the CPR, with the focus on measurable outpueffects delivered by cohesion policy in order to increase the sustainability of investments and guarantee the effectiveness of funding programmes;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Calls for a fully integrated approach to related delivery instruments (CLLD, ITIs, JAPs), allowing local partnerships to choose, according to their individual needs, different combinations of these instruments as appropriate, with these instruments to be used to deliver more than one thematic priority with funding from more than one fund at the same time;and for consideration to be given to the possibility of applying more flexible arrangements for concentrating resources, taking into account the specific needs of Member States and regions.
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 5
Subheading 5
24. Underlines the need to look at examples such as the integrated use of EARDF and EFF funds through community-led local development in the future programming period as a way of developing synergies between all funds covered by the CPR; Joint action plans25. Recognises that community-led local development strategies should be an instrument for achieving various thematic objectives and development priorities, rather than an investment priority in themselves. Community-led local development strategies must be carried out in line with the thematic objective of promoting social inclusion and combating poverty, while in the other thematic objectives they can fulfil equally important functions. In this regard, changes should be envisaged to strengthen support for local institutional capacity and enable more flexible use of tools such as CLLD strategies;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 a (new)
Paragraph 28 a (new)
28a. Considers that the joint action plans, which are instruments for promoting closer integration of various funds aimed at achieving a common objective, should be an operational document drawn up by local authorities for the purpose of, among other things, better addressing a range of problems requiring intervention in different areas.
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 b (new)
Paragraph 28 b (new)
28b. Recognises that joint action plans can be a very effective form of providing technical assistance as well as a means of achieving the balanced integration of young people into the labour market;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28 c (new)
Paragraph 28 c (new)
28c. Points out that in order to minimise the risk of excessively long decision- making processes and complicated administrative procedures, the system for implementing the joint action plans could envisage the establishment, at the first stage, of an institution responsible for managing the programme at regional level with the task of assessing the joint action plans. At the second stage the individual projects could be submitted to the various entities responsible solely for the contracting of funds, as a continuation of a previously approved joint action plan (the entity would only submit, for example, the budget for a given project, together with an indication of the results to be achieved as a result of the intervention). The institution confirming a joint action plan would be responsible for monitoring and assessing the whole plan, including synergy effects and added value. The individual contracting institutions would, on the other hand, be responsible for the implementation of the budget and the impact of the individual tasks;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29 a (new)
Paragraph 29 a (new)
29a. Calls on the Commission to define at EU level clear criteria for the selection of functional urban areas, in which integrated actions for sustainable urban development would be carried out. On the basis of these criteria and taking into account national and regional strategies, Member States would choose the functional urban areas to be included in a Partnership Contract. This would be a list of functional urban areas meeting the criteria and having the potential to carry out Integrated Territorial Investments. However, it would be up to the Member States/Managing Authorities to decide which functional urban areas could ultimately implement ITI, depending on whether a given functional urban area is fulfilling obligations in connection with the implementation of ITI;