Procedure completed
2008/2174(INI) Green Paper on territorial cohesion and the state for the debate on the future reform of cohesion policy
Lead committee dossier: REGI/6/64998
Legal Basis RoP 052, RoP 052-p2
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lead | REGI | VAN NISTELROOIJ Lambert (PPE-DE) |
Legal Basis RoP 052, RoP 052-p2
Activites
-
2009/03/24
Results of vote in Parliament
- Results of vote in Parliament
- Debate in Parliament
-
T6-0163/2009
summary
The European Parliament adopted by 606 votes to 50, with 29 abstentions, a resolution on the Commission Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion and the state for the debate on the future reform of Cohesion policy. Parliament endorses the main conclusions of the public consultation on the future of EU cohesion policy, as presented in the Fifth Progress Report of 19 June 2008 on economic and social cohesion. Assessment of the Green Paper: Parliament welcomes the Commission's adoption of the Green Paper, in response to Parliament's long-standing demand. It considers, however, that the Green Paper lacks ambition to the extent that it fails to propose either a clear definition of or an objective for territorial cohesion and does not advance significantly the understanding of that new concept, so that it can effectively contribute to the alleviation of disparities between regions. It regrets, moreover that the Green Paper does not explain how territorial cohesion will be integrated into the existing framework of cohesion policy or with what methodological tools or resources it will be transformed from a framework of principles into operational mechanisms to be applied on the ground during the next programming period. Parliament also considers that the Green Paper does not take due account of the commitments made in the Territorial Agenda and Leipzig Charter, in particular as regards the polycentrism principle or the new urban-rural partnership. Those objectives need to be central to the debate on territorial cohesion. Parliament welcomes the launch of the public consultation, as requested in the Green Paper. It calls on the competent authorities to disseminate the relevant information, in order to raise awareness about the importance of this new concept. The resolution considers the coordination of all sectoral Community policies that have a strong territorial impact to be central to the development of territorial cohesion. It regrets, therefore, that the relevant analysis in the Green Paper is confined to listing those EU policies without suggesting ways of improving synergies between them or even methods by which, in fact, to measure the territorial impact of those policies.Parliament agrees with the approach of not including any references to possible budgetary and financial implications of territorial cohesion in the Green Paper or in the public debate. It requests that the outcome of this debate will serve as the basis for the next financial framework.Analysis of the concept of territorial cohesion: Parliament endorses the position of the Green Paper that territorial cohesion is about ensuring the polycentric development of the EU as a whole, as well as the balanced and sustainable development of territories with different characteristics while also preserving their diversity. The resolution believes that territorial cohesion is a distinct concept that provides tangible added value to economic and social cohesion and a solution to the growing challenges of the EU regions. Parliament stresses that territorial cohesion should be introduced into the existing framework without causing the sectoral fragmentation of the EU cohesion policy.Parliament stresses the following:excellence centres and clusters of research and innovation may be one way of ensuring economic success, and the Commission should present an impact assessment analysing the effect of these on surrounding areas;priority be given to any policies that promote a genuinely polycentric development of territories, in order to lessen the pressures on capital cities and encourage the emergence of secondary poles;the importance of public services in relation to sustainable development as well as the need for socially and regionally equitable access to services of general interest;territorial cohesion should not be a policy exclusively directed towards regions with geographical handicaps, but special consideration should be given on how to offset their handicaps stimulate development.Recommendations for the future of territorial cohesion: Parliament expects that a clear and sufficiently flexible definition of territorial cohesion should result from the public consultation and it notes, in this respect, the proposal for a definition put forward by the French Council Presidency. It considers, however, that territorial cohesion must be subject to the subsidiarity principle in all areas, and that common definitions of concepts such as 'territory', 'rural area' and 'mountain area' should also be established. A number of elements should be central to the future definition of territorial cohesion, including the notion that territorial cohesion extends beyond economic and social cohesion and that its horizontal nature and integrated approach encourages action across territories and boundaries. Territorial cohesion aims at reducing disparities between Member States and regions and should ensure the harmonious and sustainable development of geographical areas with different characteristics and specificities by assessing how EU cohesion and other sectoral policies can be best tailored to their situation. Any future definition should also make clear that territorial cohesion should focus strongly on good governance, also with regard to partnership between public, private and civil society players, providing citizens with fair opportunities in terms of living conditions and quality of life.Parliament strongly urges the Commission to proceed with the publication of a White Paper on territorial cohesion, following the end of its consultation process. A White Paper would be instrumental in clearly defining the notion of territorial cohesion and its added value for cohesion policy, and would propose concrete provisions and policy actions, which should subsequently be introduced in the post-2013 legislative package on Structural Funds and the related financial framework. An initial statement on possible budgetary and financial implications of territorial cohesion should also be included in such a White Paper.
- 2009/02/20 Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
-
2009/02/12
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
-
2008/09/04
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
-
2008/06/19
Non-legislative basic document published
-
COM(2008)0371
summary
PURPOSE: to present the fifth progress report on economic and social cohesion.BACKGROUND: in September 2007, the Commission launched a public consultation on the challenges with which cohesion policy will be confronted in the coming years to collect ideas on the priorities, organisation and governance of the policy. The first part of this report provides a synthesis of the contributions received between September 2007 and February 2008. This first phase of the debate helps to identify issues for discussion and direction for reflection, which the Commission will take into serious consideration in the context of the budget review. The second part of the report provides a more in-depth analysis of major regional trends. The theme of this progress report is European growth sectors, whose performance in the regions will, to a large degree, determine the level of regional economic development in the years to come.Objectives and priorities: all contributions agree that the main objective of cohesion policy is the reduction of economic and social disparities between the levels of development of European regions. Lagging regions must thus remain the focus of the policy. Yet, a majority of contributions – along with the European Parliament – argues that the policy should cover the whole territory of the EU, considering that cohesion policy is not a simple mechanism of solidarity, but also aims at fostering the endogenous development potential of European regions. The large majority of stakeholders recognise territorial cooperation as an essential part of cohesion policy and call for it to be strengthened.Concerning the content of cohesion policy, a consensus seems to emerge at this stage on the following cross-cutting themes: 1) competitiveness linked to the renewed Agenda for growth and jobs; 2) active labour market policies to boost employment, strengthen social cohesion and reduce the risk of poverty and 3) sustainable development. In addition to the above themes a number of other issues received considerable attention such as the inclusion of territorial cohesion in the Lisbon Treaty. Convergence, growth and economic restructuring among EU regions: the report notes that convergence among European regions has remained strong in recent years, leading to a marked narrowing of disparities in GDP per head, employment and especially unemployment rates. For the purpose of the analysis which follows, regions have been grouped into three categories: 1) Convergence, 2) Transition, and 3) Regional Competitiveness and Employment (RCE) regions, each with a distinct socio-economic profile. Convergence regions still have a considerably lower GDP per head, at 58% of the EU average while Transition regions are getting closer to the EU average. Between 2000 and 2005, both groups of regions reduced the gap with the EU average by around 5 percentage points. Employment rates are low at 58% in Convergence regions, compared to 68% in RCE regions. Since 2000, Convergence regions have not been able to reduce this gap. Transition regions, however, did reduce the gap and now have a 63% employment rate, but remain well below the RCE regions. Employment rates are low at 58% in Convergence regions, compared to 68% in RCE regions. Since 2000, Convergence regions have not been able to reduce this gap. Transition regions, however, did reduce the gap and now have a 63% employment rate, but remain well below the RCE regions. Unemployment rates are still four percentage points higher in Convergence than in RCE regions, but this gap was almost twice as big in 2000.Regional distribution of European high growth sectors: at the regional level, three growth sectors are analysed: 1) Financial and business services, 2) Trade, transport and communication and 3) Construction. The growth sector, high and medium-high tech manufacturing, is part of the industry sector and thus can not be readily identified at the regional level. The three types of regions differ in terms of economic structure, growth trends and productivity. Convergence regions: the three growth sectors have contributed to substantial employment creation, but not enough to offset the significant employment reductions in agriculture. GVA growth was also strong in the growth sectors especially in Financial and business services and Trade, transport and communication. Convergence regions are undergoing a major economic restructuring. Substantial employment is being created in the service sector, while agriculture is shedding even more employment. GVA growth is high especially in industry and services and productivity growth is three times higher than in RCE regions. Such restructuring requires a tailored policy response. The report states that convergence regions should facilitate the shift of employment to services, especially to sectors which do not require high education levels, and continue to modernise their agriculture sector. As industry is and will remain an important sector in Convergence regions, policy should facilitate a progressive reorientation of the industry towards high productivity and high value added activities to avoid specialisation in industrial sectors particularly exposed to international competition and offering poor growth prospects. Convergence regions should also aim to improve the education level of the labour force as shifting to higher value added activities will increase the demand for such labour. The share of highly educated people aged 25-64 is considerably lower in Convergence regions than in RCE regions, 17% and 25% respectively.Transition regions: transition regions are catching up rapidly with RCE regions thanks to the strong performance of the three growth sectors and high and medium-high tech manufacturing. As a result, the economic structure of Transition regions is becoming more and more like that of RCE regions. This will also influence the speed at which they adopt new technologies and help to reduce the productivity gap.Lastly, the high productivity levels in RCE regions give these regions an edge not only in Europe but also in the world. In part, this high productivity is due to strong investments in R&D, which are much higher than in Convergence regions. Yet to maintain a global edge, these regions have to be able to compete with other world competitors, which invest even higher shares in R&D and higher education. This clearly underlines the benefit of the increasing orientation of cohesion policy in RCE towards more investments in innovation and human capital.Next steps: the debate on the future of cohesion policy has just started and will continue in the coming years. Among the many important events which will mark this debate, it is worth mentioning the ongoing public consultation on the budget review, the public consultation on the Green Paper on territorial cohesion which the Commission will launch in autumn 2008, and the ministerial and high-level events which will be organised under the different Presidencies. The Commission will report on the progress of this reflection in the Sixth progress report on economic and social cohesion in spring 2009. In due course, the Commission will present its report on the 2008/2009 budget review setting out its overall vision for the structure and direction of the EU's future spending priorities.
- DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/regional_policy/index_en.htm', 'title': 'Regional Policy'}, HÜBNER Danuta
-
COM(2008)0371
summary
Documents
- Non-legislative basic document published: COM(2008)0371
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A6-0083/2009
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading: T6-0163/2009
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 200 |
2008/2174(INI)
2008/12/10
REGI
200 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 2 a (new) - having regard to the Commission staff working document Regions 2020 - an assessment of future challenges for EU regions (SEC(2008)2868),
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas cohesion policy has already been successful in creating important synergies with other Community policies with the aim of increasing their impact on the ground and for the benefit of European citizens and synergies
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 b (new) 15b. Recalls, in this respect, that the conclusions of the Competitiveness Council of 1 December 2008 call on the Member States and the Commission to "ensure the efficient implementation of the Small Business Act for Europe at all relevant levels";
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes that the Green Paper
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes that the Green Paper acknowledges the particular development challenges of regions with specific geographical features, such as mountainous regions, island regions and sparsely populated regions; also notes that border regions face specific policy challenges in terms of accessibility, quality and efficiency; rejects the view that territorial cohesion should be a policy exclusively dedicated to addressing the problems of those regions; considers, however, that
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes that the Green Paper acknowledges the particular development challenges of regions with specific geographical features
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes that the Green Paper acknowledges the particular development challenges of regions with specific geographical features, such as mountainous regions, island regions and sparsely populated regions; also notes that border, coastal, outlying and remote regions face specific policy challenges in terms of
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes that the Green Paper acknowledges the particular development challenges of regions with specific geographical features, such as mountainous regions, island regions and sparsely populated regions; also notes that border regions face s
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes that the Green Paper acknowledges the particular development challenges of regions with specific geographical features, such as mountainous regions, island regions and sparsely populated regions; also notes that border and outlying regions face specific policy challenges in terms of accessibility, quality and efficiency; rejects the view that territorial cohesion should be a policy exclusively dedicated to addressing the problems of those regions; considers, however, that special consideration should be given to the development of those regions in order to offset their handicaps and enable them to effectively contribute to the harmonious development of the Union as a whole;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes that the Green Paper acknowledges the particular development challenges of regions with specific geographical features, such as mountainous regions, island regions, outermost regions, outlying border towns, regions experiencing depopulation and sparsely populated regions; also notes that border regions face specific policy challenges in terms of accessibility, quality and efficiency; rejects the view that territorial cohesion should be a policy exclusively dedicated to addressing the problems of those regions; considers, however, that special consideration should be given to the development of those regions in order to offset their handicaps and enable them to effectively contribute to the harmonious development of the Union as a whole;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes that the Green Paper acknowledges the particular development challenges of regions with specific geographical features, such as mountainous regions, island regions and sparsely populated regions; also notes that border regions face specific policy challenges in terms of accessibility, quality and
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes that the Green Paper acknowledges the particular development challenges of regions with specific geographical features, such as mountainous regions, island regions, the outermost regions established in Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty and sparsely populated regions; also notes that border regions face specific policy challenges in terms of accessibility, quality and efficiency; rejects the view that territorial cohesion should be a policy exclusively dedicated to addressing the problems of those regions; considers, however, that special consideration should be given to the development of those regions in order to offset their handicaps and enable them to effectively contribute to the harmonious development of the Union as a whole;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas cohesion policy has already been successful in creating important synergies with other Community policies with the aim of increasing their impact on the ground and
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes that the Green Paper acknowledges the particular development challenges of regions with specific geographical features, such as mountainous regions, island regions and sparsely populated regions; believes that the specific feature of remoteness should also be included; also notes that border regions face specific challenges in terms of accessibility, quality and efficiency; rejects the view that territorial cohesion should be a policy exclusively dedicated to addressing the problems of those regions; considers, however, that special consideration should be given to the development of those regions in order to offset their handicaps and enable them to effectively contribute to the harmonious development of the Union as a whole;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes that the Green Paper acknowledges the particular development challenges of regions with specific geographical features, such as mountainous regions, island regions and sparsely populated regions; also notes that border regions face specific policy challenges in terms of accessibility, quality and
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Notes that the Green Paper acknowledges the particular development challenges of regions with specific geographical features, such as mountainous regions, island regions, island Member States and sparsely populated regions; also notes that border regions face specific policy challenges in terms of accessibility, quality and efficiency; rejects the view that territorial cohesion should be a policy exclusively dedicated to addressing the problems of those regions; considers, however, that special consideration should be given to the development of those regions in order to offset their handicaps and enable them to effectively contribute to the harmonious development of the Union as a whole;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. Recommends that EU cohesion policy, in its various dimensions, should be adapted, by adopting specific measures, to the outermost regions, as established in Article 299(2) of the EC Treaty; asks the Commission to propose permanent, flexible and adequately financed policies and measures capable of meeting the needs of each outermost region and helping to tackle the permanent development challenges faced by these regions;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. Recalls the specific nature of urban areas and that the combination of a high urban concentration of population and activity creates negative factors for cities, such as congestion, pollution, social exclusion and pockets of poverty, which affect the quality of life of their citizens.
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Believes that territorial cohesion should not only be limited to the effects of EU regional policy on the European territory, but to also be concerned with the territorial dimension of other
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 a (new) 17a. Considers that a spatial analysis of the entire EU territory should be carried out prior to the setting of individual sectoral policy priorities at the start of each programming period;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Expects that a clear definition of territorial cohesion should result from the public consultation, which will be commonly agreed
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Expects that a clear and sufficiently flexible definition of territorial cohesion should result from the public consultation, which will be commonly agreed, shared
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18a. Considers that a number of elements should be central to the future definition of territorial cohesion, including the notion that territorial cohesion extends beyond economic and social cohesion and that its horizontal nature and integrated approach encourages action across territories and boundaries; believes that territorial cohesion aims at ensuring the harmonious development of geographical areas with different characteristics and specificities by promoting and protecting their inherent features and turning them into assets for their development; stresses that any future definition should also make clear that territorial cohesion should mainly focus on good governance, providing Union citizens with fair opportunities in terms of living conditions and quality of life;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18a. Believes that it is worth considering the adoption of a definition to the effect that territorial cohesion consists of the elimination of all barriers to and restrictions on development that lessen the chances of achieving economic and social cohesion in a given area; underlines the need, in this regard, to remove transport barriers, create links between growth centres and the region as a whole, foster interregional and crossborder cooperation and ties and develop networks for scientific cooperation and the creation of links between R & D and the business world;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18a. Believes, however, that any such definition must allow identification of the manner in which communities across the EU may have common characteristics and assessment of how sectoral and other policies can be best tailored to the specificities of their situation; considers in this connection that, in fact, an assessment of the territorial assets of all EU territories should be undertaken; believes that common definitions of closely related concepts such as "territory", "urban area", "rural area", "upland area", "mountain area", "remote area", and others should be reached.
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18a. Emphasises that an accurate definition of the different circumstances, strengths and weaknesses of individual territories is crucial for realising the added value implied in territorial cohesion; special features may act as a basis for the division of labour while the European Union’s cohesion policy is brought to fruition;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 a (new) 18a. Stresses that territorial cohesion must be introduced into the concept of the Union’s single cohesion policy and may not result in a sectoral fragmentation of EU cohesion policy.
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 b (new) 18b. Is of the view that the added value of the territorial dimension should be the fact that, while those regions faring the worst continue to receive support, investment is directed to precisely those areas with the potential to drive development across the wider territory;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 b (new) 18b. Considers that first of all there should be an examination of the way in which the instruments that are currently available could be extended so as to apply to the territorial cohesion objectives;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 c (new) Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Strongly urges the Commission to proceed with the publication of a White Paper on Territorial Cohesion, following the end of this consultation process; believes that a White Paper will be instrumental in c
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Strongly urges the Commission to proceed with the publication of a White Paper on Territorial Cohesion, following the end of this consultation process; believes that a White Paper will be instrumental in consolidating the notion of territorial cohesion as well as proposing
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Calls on the Commission to carry out an assessment of the contribution of the Lisbon and Gothenburg strategies to territorial cohesion, as part of the earmarking operation for the 2007-2013 Structural Funds;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas cohesion policy has already been successful in creating some important synergies with other Community policies with the aim of increasing their impact on the ground and for the benefit of European citizens and synergies that established between cohesion policy and research and innovation or the Lisbon strategy represent success stories that have delivered tangible positive results;
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. Stresses that the convergence among countries very often masks a widening gap between and within regions and within individual regions; notes that those regional and local disparities can be observed in a number of areas, such as employment, productivity, income, education levels and innovation capacity; stresses also the role of territorial cooperation in helping to overcome these problems;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 a (new) 20a. recommends that the impact assessment mechanism currently used by the European Commission be extended to territorial aspects;
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 b (new) 20b. Points out that regional competitiveness depends to a great extent on productivity, on the accessibility of markets and on the level of qualification of the work force, all of which vary significantly more among regions and even within a single region than among Member States; notes furthermore that institutional factors are increasingly seen as key elements in competitiveness, such factors including the endowment of social capital in the form of business culture and shared norms of behaviour which facilitate cooperation and enterprise and also the efficiency of public administration;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 b (new) 20b. Taking into account the fact that this is a new concept, it is especially important with regard to cooperation that not only horizontal but also vertical communication be developed between players in different sectors;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 c (new) 20c. Notes in this connection that some developed regions and even some less developed regions are beginning to experience multiple problems having strong territorial impact in terms of development potential: low economic growth rates, falling productivity and employment, ageing populations and depopulation;
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Calls for a significant reinforcement of the European Territorial Cooperation Objective for the next programming period; is convinced of the European added value of this objective, not least because of the direct involvement of regional and local authorities in the planning and implementation of the relevant programmes of cross-border, trans-national and interregional cooperation; to that effect, stresses also the
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Calls for a significant reinforcement of the European Territorial Cooperation Objective for the next programming period; is convinced of the European added value of this objective, not least because of the direct involvement of regional and local authorities in the planning and implementation of the relevant programmes of cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation; to that effect, stresses also the importance of the cross-border dimension and the relevant operational programmes of the European
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Calls for a significant reinforcement of the European Territorial Cooperation Objective for the next programming period; is convinced of the European added value of this objective, not least because of the direct involvement of regional and local authorities in the planning and implementation of the relevant programmes of cross-border, trans-national and interregional cooperation; to that effect, stresses also the importance of the cross-border dimension and the relevant operational programmes of the European Neighbourhood Policy and the integrated development of sea basins;
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Is of the opinion that territorial cohesion should develop as a horizontal principle that underpins all Community policies and actions; believes that the evolution of the principle of sustainable development and environmental protection should serve as an example of how to integrate territorial cohesion in the future development of all relevant Community policies; calls on the Commission to proceed immediately with an inter-service consultation and promptly take all the necessary initiatives, working intensively to translate into legislative proposals the necessary coordination of sectoral policies on interventions at every territorial level;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) Ca. Whereas the new challenges facing cohesion policy which have a significant territorial impact, such as demographic change, urban concentration, segregation, migratory movements (which are particularly problematic for rural and peripheral areas), adjustment to globalisation, climate change, energy supply, and the slow catch-up process of rural areas can only be addressed only if the great significance of economic, social and territorial cohesion policy is recognised for this purpose in the future;
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. Notes that climate change will have significant repercussions for territorial cohesion but impact will vary depending on the region; natural disasters, such as forest fires, droughts and floods, will be more frequent and severe and will call for responses that differ depending on the region of the EU concerned; considers that EU cohesion policy should be ‘climate-friendly’, but recalls that the possibilities open to cohesion policy in this area are limited; takes the view that the fight against climate change should also be addressed under other Community policies;
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. Since the lack of coordination between policies significantly hinders the effectiveness of realising the objectives and thus results in surplus costs, draws attention to the importance of the fact that the goals defined for territorial cohesion must, where possible, be realised within the current administrative and institutional frameworks, without further increasing the bureaucratic burden, thus significantly improving cost-effectiveness and orientation towards results;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. Emphasises that, although various EU territories have different territorial development dynamics, they all need integrated development strategies covering several development sectors and that better integration of different EU and national funding sources as well as other policy measures is therefore essential;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 b (new) 22b. Recalls the importance of mainstreaming the gender perspective, equal opportunities and the special needs of persons with disabilities and senior citizens at every stage in the implementation and assessment of cohesion policy;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23.
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Stresses the need to elaborate, in the context of territorial cohesion, additional qualitative indicators with the purpose of better designing and implementing the corresponding policies on the ground, taking into account the different territorial specificities;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Stresses the need to elaborate, in the context of territorial cohesion, additional qualitative indicators with the purpose of better designing and implementing the corresponding policies on the ground, taking into account the different territorial specificities and safeguarding natural resources; underlines, however, that the GDP remains the
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Stresses the need to elaborate, in the context of territorial cohesion, additional qualitative indicators with the purpose of better designing and implementing the corresponding policies on the ground, taking into account the different territorial specificities; underlines, however, that the GDP
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Stresses the need to elaborate, in the context of territorial cohesion, additional qualitative indicators with the purpose of better designing and implementing the corresponding policies on the ground, taking into account the different territorial specificities; underlines, however, that the GDP
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas cohesion policy and its associated financial resources should be used to promote economic, social and territorial development and should not therefore be subordinated to competition and deregulation under the ‘Lisbon Strategy’;
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Stresses the need to elaborate, in the context of territorial cohesion, additional qualitative indicators with the purpose of
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Stresses the need to elaborate, in the context of territorial cohesion, additional qualitative indicators with the purpose of better designing and implementing the corresponding policies on the ground, taking into account the different territorial specificities;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Stresses the need to elaborate, in the
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Stresses the need to elaborate, in the context of territorial cohesion, additional qualitative indicators with the purpose of better designing and implementing the corresponding policies on the ground, taking into account the different territorial specificities; underlines, however, that the GDP remains the
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Stresses the need to elaborate, in the context of territorial cohesion, additional qualitative indicators and criteria with the purpose of
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Stresses the need to elaborate, in the context of territorial cohesion, additional qualitative indicators with the purpose of better designing and implementing the corresponding policies on the ground, taking into account the different territorial specificities; recalls, in this respect, that a quantitative database at NUTS III level or at a lower level would make it possible to target needs more effectively and develop potential at both subregional and neighbourhood level in order to take into account intra-urban disparities; underlines, however, that
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Stresses the need to elaborate, in the context of territorial cohesion, additional qualitative indicators with the purpose of better designing and implementing the corresponding policies on the ground, taking into account the different territorial specificities; underlines, however, that the GDP
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) 23a. Highlights the need to have the right instruments to take account of territorial disparities in public policies for example, disposable income per capita to take account of transfers, (which GDP per capita does not do), fiscal capacity and accessibility of different services (transport, energy distribution, health, education), or even the creation of composite human development indices;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) 23a. Calls on the Commission to examine the extent to which the problem of the erosion of the internal development differentials of NUTS II areas can be countered in future by defining assisted areas at NUTS III level;
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) 23a. Since the objective of cohesion policy is for the quality of life of European Union citizens to be at the same level throughout the territory of the Union, considers it crucial to apply the same indicators that are capable of measuring the level of quality of life;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas the Gothenburg strategy for sustainable development is particularly suited to fostering the link between economic efficiency, social cohesion and ecological balance;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) 23a. Notes that indicators other than GDP can already be employed in regions eligible under the regional competitiveness and employment objective and stresses that these should include the designation of areas as mountainous, island, remote or sparsely populated;
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 b (new) 23b. Considers also that there may be grounds for reconsidering the NUTs levels at which eligibility is assessed, in order to enable funding to be better targeted;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Believes that in order to better coordinate the territorial impact of sectoral Community policies, there needs to be a better understanding and measurement of those impacts; urges, therefore, the Commission to proceed with a territorial impact assessment of those policies; expects that the Commission will also present concrete ways of creating synergies between these territorial and sectoral policies; emphasises that European policies, and more particularly cohesion policy, have transformed governance from an often centralised system characterised by compartmentalisation (both geographical and sectoral) into an increasingly integrated, multi-level system; recalls, in this respect, that Community initiatives, such as URBAN I and II in urban areas and LEADER in rural areas, have shown the effectiveness of their methodology, which is based, for example, on a multi-sectoral, territorial and bottom-up integrated approach.
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Calls on all European stakeholders, public authorities, states and citizens to establish a formal system of territorial governance which goes beyond the traditional administrative and legal frameworks, and aims: – to combine the forces of the various stakeholders involved in responding to a single need of its citizens/users, in an area corresponding to this need, and – to act coherently and effectively, i.e. by using recognised methods, such as project management, and by using the various existing legal frameworks for cooperation;
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Proposes that priority be given to any policies that promote a genuinely polycentric development of territories, in order to lessen the pressures on capital cities and encourage the emergence of secondary poles; considers that support for rural areas and the important role played by small and medium-sized towns located in rural areas should not be overlooked in that regard;
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Calls on the Commission to submit a proposal for the introduction of a territorial component in the Strategic Environmental Assessment in order to take due account of the regional planning effects of programmes, plans and projects;
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 b (new) 24b. Reiterates its request to the Commission that it carry out a specific analysis of the impact and effectiveness of the Structural Funds and European policies aimed at SMEs in the regions, as well as of the administrative and financial difficulties encountered by such SMEs;
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25.
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Reiterates its long-standing request for the development of a comprehensive EU strategy for regions with specific geographical features, which will enable them to better address problems and challenges they are facing; believes that an EU strategy should
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Reiterates its long-standing request for the development of a comprehensive EU strategy for regions with specific
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C b (new) Cb. whereas, as is noted in the Commission working document ‘Regions 2020’, the three interconnected crises of climate change, demographic change and the financial sector, combined with the risk of poverty and unemployment, represent a particular problem for economic, social and territorial cohesion and the Commission does not give adequate consideration to the results of this analysis either in its Fifth Progress Report or in its Green Paper, in particular with regard to the negative, long-term effects of climate change on European regions and the pressing requirement to reorient European structural policy in order to curb climate change;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Reiterates its long-standing request for the development of a comprehensive EU strategy for regions with specific geographical features, which will enable them to better address problems and challenges they are facing; believes that an EU strategy should also be concerned on how to adapt Community policies to the specific needs and assets of these territories; underlines that the implementation of such a strategy is an essential condition for the development of these territories in the context of territorial cohesion;
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. Points to regional disparities in terms of accessibility and communications between centres and peripheral areas, which are the result of geographical and structural disadvantages, insufficient investment in transport infrastructure, as well as a failure to diversify potential transport links, and insufficient public services such as education and health, etc.; points in particular to the substantial obstacles in terms of accessibility for mountainous and island regions as well as the peripheral and outermost regions, outlying border towns, sparsely populated areas and areas experiencing depopulation; Calls on the Community institutions, the Member States and regional and local authorities to take specific measures to reduce the disparities between territorially accessible regions and regions with structural disadvantages and to boost regional potential, the attractiveness of these regions and their sustainable development;
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. In the light of the results of the analysis of the operational programmes cofinanced by the European Regional Development Fund for the period 2007- 2013, calls on the Commission, the Member States and the authorities managing the Structural Funds to improve good urban governance, particularly through the use of technical assistance to promote sustainable urban development or the delegation of action to local urban authorities;
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. Stresses that in addition to regional planning cooperation the implementation of Natura 2000, including the networking of natural habitats, is the main European activity which influences the Member States’ spatial planning; calls on the Member States above all to enshrine the European principles of polycentric development and urban-rural partnership in their regional planning;
Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. Draws attention to the fact that a multi-level strategy is needed for effective realisation, which must aim not to have one common plan for all regions, and the European Union should merely show the way towards developing regional strategies that reflect specific characteristics;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. Emphasises the need for coordinated and comprehensive EU strategies to support the development of urban and rural areas that will enable them to address jointly the problems and challenges they are facing;
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 b (new) 25b. Emphasises that the concept of territorial cohesion must be broken down into more specific goals that are formulated at local level;
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 c (new) 25c. Emphasises the seriousness of the problem of depopulation in many territories of the EU, which brings with it the ageing of the population, the loss of human capital, capital flight, more expensive services, and so on;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 a (new) 26a. Stresses the need to address in the context of territorial cohesion the growing intra-regional disparities in several parts of the Union and to develop a strategy for the most disadvantaged and deprived areas suffering from territorial and social exclusion;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 a (new) Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C b (new) Cb. Whereas the most recent cohesion reports highlight a trend towards worsening territorial disparities between European regions and at sub-regional level, disparities characterised by phenomena such as spatial segregation, which have encouraged certain forms of ghettoisation to emerge, and the continued decline of some remote and predominantly agricultural rural areas, making it more necessary now than ever to make territorial cohesion an objective of the European Union;
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Draws attention to the situation of regions which, despite being among the poorest in the EU-15, are now excluded from the group of poorest regions in the EU-27, solely for statistical reasons; recommends that attention is paid to the specific situation of these regions which suffered cuts in payments in the current financial framework; considers that this framework should be revised so that the regions affected by this ‘statistical effect’ can receive the same level of support that they would have received if the eligibility criterion had been based on the EU-15;
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Asks for the objectives of the Territorial Agenda and the Leipzig Charter to be included in the adoption of a specific action programme to improve integration of the territorial dimension into all public policies at Community, national, regional and local levels;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Reiterates its call on the Member States to schedule specific Council sessions involving the ministers responsible for cohesion policy;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 b (new) 27b. Calls on the Commission to address the serious problem of uncontrolled urbanisation which can give rise to demographic, economic, social, transport, and environmental imbalances within a restricted area and lead to suburbanisation and the depopulation of rural areas that are far from towns;
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28. Notes with great interest that the 5th Progress Report makes for the first time specific reference to "Transition Regions", which are situated between "Convergence Regions" and "Competitiveness and Employment Regions"; acknowledges the need to deal separately with these regions that are now scattered as "phasing in" or "phasing out" regions between the two Objectives; calls on the Commission, in the context of territorial cohesion, to establish a more comprehensive system of gradual transitional assistance to regions that will soon be above the 75% GDP threshold, in order to provide them with a clearer status and more security in their development; believes that consideration should be given to allocating funding to ‘phasing- out’regions and financing earmarked for NUTS 3 regions for which GDP is below 75% of the EU average, with special attention paid to the growing gaps between the capital and other areas of a region;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 a (new) 28a. Recalls the importance of transitional funding mechanisms for phasing-in and phasing-out regions and for States which are dropping out of the Cohesion Fund in order to consolidate the levels of convergence they have achieved;
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Considers that t
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Considers that taking an integrated approach will have a greater chance of success if the regional and local authorities, as well as stakeholders, including the economic and social partners, who can provide an overall view and understanding of the needs and specificities of a given territory, are involved from the beginning in the designing and implementation of the development strategies of each territory; calls on the Commission and the Member States to promote, in the regions, the establishment and operation of committees and working parties consisting of representatives of public authorities and the stakeholders involved in order to define the forms of future cooperation and to agree on future development strategies for the territories concerned;
Amendment 188 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Considers that taking an integrated approach will have a greater chance of success if the regional and local authorities, as well as stakeholders who can provide an overall view and understanding of the needs and specificities of a given territory, are involved from the beginning in the designing and implementation of the development strategies of each territory; in this connection, calls on the Commission to draw up guidelines to help Member States and local authorities to concretely implement an integrated approach so as to make the best use of synergies and complementarities between territorial and sectoral policies;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Considers that taking an integrated
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C b (new) Cb. whereas competitiveness should not be a substitute for convergence in the Member States and regions which are lagging behind in their socioeconomic development;
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Considers that taking an integrated approach will have a greater chance of success if the regional and local authorities and the partners under Article 11 of the General Regulation on the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund, as well as stakeholders who can provide an overall view and understanding of the needs and specificities of a given territory, are involved from the beginning in the designing
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 a (new) 29a. Emphasises that the effectiveness of projects that are implemented at Member State or local level should also be measured with regard to the extent to which the projects in question have contributed to improving cohesion and thus quality of life;
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Recognises that territorial cohesion
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Recognises that territorial cohesion introduces some new ideas on how to improve the governance of cohesion policy; agrees with the view that different territorial scales are needed for different problems and that therefore the establishment of real partnerships between all the parties involved in regional and local development, at
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Recognises that territorial cohesion introduces some new ideas on how to improve the governance of cohesion policy; agrees with the view that different territorial scales are needed for different problems and that therefore the
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 a (new) 30a. Recommends that, in view of the increasing importance that territorial cohesion has acquired in the context not only of regional but also of other sectoral community policies, the informal structures that have long been governing territorial cohesion and spatial planning in the Council should be replaced by formal ministerial meetings, which should convene the Ministers responsible for regional policy in the EU; believes that such an institutional development in the Council would ensure the rapid development of this policy;
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 a (new) 30a. Recalls that the delays in implementing structural policy are due in part to the excessive rigidity of procedures and that, consequently, consideration should be given to simplifying those procedures and clearly dividing responsibilities and competences among the EU, the Member States and regional and local authorities;
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 a (new) 30a. Recommends, in order to strengthen the realisation of partnerships, that the ministers of the Member States of the European Union with responsibility for regional and cohesion matters should meet regularly, thus ensuring a flow of information in connection with this issue;
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 b (new) 30b. As the aim of territorial cohesion is to ensure equal opportunities for territories with different circumstances so that the territories do not lose their diversity and individual characteristics through uniform development, cohesion must be implemented so that - in accordance with the wording of the Green Paper - we reinforce diversity, and not try to make it disappear;
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution Article 30 b (new) 30b. also urges the Member States to start reflecting now on how to better consolidate and implement the notion of territorial cohesion in their national programmes and policies;
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 3 – having regard to Articles 158
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C c (new) Cc. whereas, despite progress made in terms of convergence in the EU, absolute disparities remain high, as do differences in the levels of prosperity of the various Member States, some of which have been in a state of ongoing divergence for several years;
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution Article 30 c (new) Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C c (new) Cc. Whereas the lack of territorial cohesion prevents the European single market from functioning smoothly by reducing some territories’ access to the freedoms enshrined in the Treaties;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Recital Ca (new) Ca. whereas cohesion policy can be considered as one of the most successful EU policies, and stands as a symbol for the success of EU integration and cooperation;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Recital Ca (new) Ca. Whereas cohesion policy is an essential objective of the Union and the most visible, palpable and quantifiable expression of European solidarity and equity;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Recital Cb (new) Cb. Whereas this policy is one of the principal tools facilitating convergence between increasingly diverse regions and ensuring its sustainable and harmonious development;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Endorses the main conclusions of the public consultation on the future of EU cohesion policy, as presented in the Fifth Progress Report on economic and social cohesion; is satisfied by the great interest that different stakeholders in the field of regional policy, in particular, local and regional authorities, have already attached to this debate;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Regrets that the Commission has not presented any analysis of the existing cohesion policy as regards its impact on geographical concentration or equalisation processes or on the negative effects of climate change and demographic change in certain regions; calls on the Commission to incorporate the findings from its working document ‘Regions 2020’ in the next interim report on the Cohesion Report in connection with the description of economic, social and territorial cohesion and, in so doing, to undertake a critical analysis of the effects of European policies, as well as of incorrect prioritisation and errors made in the deployment of the Structural Funds;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Shares the view expressed in the contributions to the public consultation that the aim of cohesion can be achieved only if the policy is concentrated on the less-favoured regions; observes, however, that the analyses in the working document ‘Regions 2020’ indicate that the parameters for less-favoured areas must be redefined;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Observes that the view expressed in its above-mentioned resolution of 21 February 2008 includes the rejection of any attempt for re-nationalisation and the commitment to a single Community policy, which should also be in a position to address common challenges like globalisation and poverty, climate and demographic change, migration, energy efficiency;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 8 Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Observes that the view expressed in its above-mentioned resolution of 21 February 2008 includes the rejection of any attempt for re-nationalisation and the commitment to a single Community policy, which should also be in a position to address common challenges like globalisation, climate
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Observes that the view expressed in its above-mentioned resolution of 21 February 2008 includes the rejection of any attempt for re-nationalisation and the commitment to a single Community policy, which should also be in a position to address common challenges like globalisation, climate and demographic change, migration, energy efficiency; the strong belief that this policy should cover all EU regions, by representing an added value for everyone; the need to set priorities in the spending of EU structural policies and actions and the endorsement, with reservations, of the "earmarking" exercise;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Observes that the view expressed in its above-mentioned resolution of 21 February 2008 includes the rejection of any attempt for re-nationalisation and the commitment to a single, flexible Community policy, capable of adapting to the most appropriate scale of intervention, which should also be in a position to address common challenges like globalisation, climate and demographic change, migration, energy efficiency; the strong belief that this policy should cover all EU
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Observes that the view expressed in its above-mentioned resolution of 21 February 2008 includes the rejection of any attempt for re-nationalisation and the commitment to a single
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Observes that the view expressed in its above-mentioned resolution of 21 February 2008 includes the rejection of any attempt for re-nationalisation and the commitment to a single Community policy, which should also be in a position to address common challenges like globalisation, poverty, climate and demographic change, migration, energy efficiency and the socioeconomic disparities intensified by the recent economic crisis; the strong belief that this policy should cover all EU regions, by representing an added value for everyone; the need to set priorities in the spending of EU structural policies and actions and the endorsement of the "earmarking" exercise; as well as the need for synergies on the ground and an integrated approach between the different sectoral policies in order to achieve the optimal result for growth and development on the ground;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Observes that the view expressed in its above-mentioned resolution of 21 February 2008 includes the rejection of any attempt for re-nationalisation and the commitment to a single Community policy, which should also be in a position to address common challenges like globalisation, climate and demographic change, depopulation, migration, energy efficiency; the strong belief that this policy should cover all EU regions, by representing an added value for everyone; the need to set priorities in the spending of EU structural policies and actions and the endorsement of the ‘earmarking’ exercise; as well as the need for synergies on the ground and an integrated approach between the different sectoral policies in order to achieve the optimal result for growth and development on the ground;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Renews its call on the Commission made in the abovementioned resolution of 21 February 2008 regarding a critical evaluation of earmarking; points out that earmarking can be maintained only if it is geared to the pressing challenges of climate change and reinforces the synergies with new employment opportunities in green sectors of the economy;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Strongly rejects the Commission’s conclusion that support for the low-wage sector and the unilateral focus on industrial development in convergence regions could help to reduce regional disparities in development; stresses that the disparity between winning and losing regions which is thus reinforced is not consistent with the principles of cohesion policy; considers that regions must define their development priorities themselves and link sustainable development above all with the competences existing at regional level;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Believes that territorial cohesion is a central
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 9a (new) - having regard to its resolution of 28 September 2005 on the role of territorial cohesion in regional development1,
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Believes that territorial cohesion
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Believes that territorial cohesion has an important role in reinforcing both economic and social cohesion and thus is central to the development of EU cohesion policy; considers, therefore, that the debate on the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion to be directly linked to the future reform of EU regional policy;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Considers that the primary and principal objective of structural policy should be to reduce disparities between the levels of development of the various regions, promote real convergence and stimulate growth and employment, and that structural policy should be an instrument of redistribution and compensation for the increased costs of the single market, Economic and Monetary Union and the liberalisation of international trade for the least developed countries and regions of the European Union;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Underlines that cohesion policy should not be regarded simply as an instrument for achieving the objectives of other sectoral policies, given that it is a Community policy with high added value which has its own raison d’être: cohesion;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Stresses the need for future cohesion policy to provide satisfactory responses for regions which are currently regarded as ‘transition regions’ in such a way that neither their convergence nor their competitiveness is put at risk;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 c (new) 4c. Considers it necessary for future revisions of the rules governing the implementing provisions of the Cohesion Funds act to simplify controls, as this is can facilitate investment and as a result improve the financial capacity of the European regions;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5.
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas the Lisbon Treaty, which enshrines territorial cohesion among the fundamental objectives of the Union alongside economic and social cohesion, has not yet been ratified by all EU Member States, and its future, in view of the negative outcome of the Irish referendum, is uncertain;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Considers, however, that the Green Paper
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Considers that the Green Paper lacks ambition to the extent that it does not provide for a clear definition of territorial cohesion, and does not, therefore, advance significantly the understanding of this new concept so that it can be effectively applied in a manner which has a positive impact on the alleviation of socioeconomic disparities between regions; regrets, moreover, that the Green Paper does not explain how territorial cohesion will be integrated in the existing framework of cohesion policy and be made operational for the next programming period;
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Considers that the Green Paper lacks ambition to the extent that it does not provide for a clear definition of territorial cohesion, and does not, therefore, advance significantly the understanding of this new concept; regrets, moreover, that the Green Paper does not explain how territorial cohesion will be integrated in the existing framework of cohesion policy or with what methodological tools and operational resources it will be transformed from a framework of principles into part of the intervention mechanisms for political cohesion, so that it can be applied on the ground and be made operational for the next programming period;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Considers that the Green Paper lacks ambition to the extent that it does not provide for a clear definition of territorial cohesion, and does not, therefore, advance significantly the understanding of this new concept; regrets, moreover, that the Green Paper does not explain how territorial cohesion will be integrated into the existing framework of cohesion policy and be made operational for the next programming period; therefore calls on the Commission to respond to these shortcomings and take the necessary measures to correct them;
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Considers that the Green Paper lacks ambition to the extent that it does not provide for a clear definition
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Considers that the Green Paper does not value the commitments made in the Territorial Agenda and Leipzig Charter, which give territorial cohesion a strategic and operative vision, in particular the polycentrism principle or the new urban- rural partnership.
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Emphasises that the concept of territorial cohesion also embraces cohesion within territories, which is to be achieved by supporting territorial capital, its potential and links with suburban and rural areas.
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7.
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Welcomes the analysis contained in the Green Paper which defines three key concepts that should be central to the development of territorial cohesion:
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Welcomes the analysis contained in the Green Paper which defines three key concepts that should be central to the development of territorial cohesion: concentration, connection and cooperation; considers that these concepts can provide the solution to some basic obstacles that hinder the harmonious development of the Union, like the negative effects associated with the concentration of economic activity, the inequalities in terms of access to markets and services that result from distance and/or concentration, and the divisions that are imposed by boundaries between Member States but also regions;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the concept of territorial cohesion has always been implicit in cohesion policy since its inception and at the core of its development; whereas the
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Notes that consideration should be given to the fact that a high level of dispersion over excessively small population clusters (fewer than 500 inhabitants) places too much strain on the network of settlements which, unless in receipt of aid under specific cohesion policies, becomes incapable of performing the economic and social functions which allow the balance between population and territory to be maintained sustainably; is therefore of the view that population density should be weighted in line with the structural capacity of the population to be sustained in order to ensure balanced regional development and address the challenges of competitiveness and sustainability;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Welcomes the launching of the public consultation on territorial cohesion, as requested in the Green Paper; considers that the success of any public consultation is directly linked with the widest possible participation of the different stakeholders and civil society; calls on the competent national, regional and local authorities to disseminate without delay the relevant
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Welcomes the launching of the public consultation on territorial cohesion, as requested in the Green Paper; considers that the success of any public consultation is directly linked with the widest possible participation of the different stakeholders and civil society; calls on the competent national, regional and local authorities to disseminate without delay the relevant information, in order to raise awareness about the importance of this new concept;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Considers the coordination of all sectoral Community policies that have a strong territorial impact to be central to the development of territorial cohesion and the reinforcement of economic and social cohesion; regrets, therefore, that the relevant analysis in the Green Paper is confined in listing these EU policies without suggesting ways of improving synergies between them or even methods to actually measure the
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10.
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Agrees with the approach of not including
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Agrees with the approach of not including any references to possible budgetary and financial implications of territorial cohesion in the Green Paper and the public debate; considers that such an analysis would be premature until the concept itself is clearly defined and understood by all stakeholders;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Agrees with the approach of not including any references to possible budgetary and financial implications of territorial cohesion in the Green Paper and
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) (before title "Analysis of the concept of Territorial Cohesion") 10a. Considers that the current Community financial resources for cohesion policy are insufficient to respond to the requirements of real convergence, regional disparities, high levels of unemployment, income inequalities and poverty in the European Union; therefore reiterates the need for an increase in the Community budget, with the central and primary objective being to promote economic and social cohesion at EU level;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 b (new) (before title "Analysis of the concept of Territorial Cohesion") 10b. Considers that the existence of a strong and well-financed European regional policy is a sine qua non for tackling successive enlargements and for achieving social, economic and territorial cohesion in an enlarged EU;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. Whereas the objective of territorial cohesion complements those of economic and social cohesion; whereas these three forms of cohesion must be mutually reinforcing, meaning that the objective of territorial cohesion should be taken into account in all common policies having a territorial impact, particularly the regional policy;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 c (new) (after title "Analysis of the concept of Territorial Cohesion") 10c. Emphasises that the territorial dimension should not counteract or dilute the primary objective of regional policy which is to promote economic and social cohesion, in other words to reduce disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the lagging behind of the least-favoured regions; underlines that new Community financial resources should be provided for the new objectives and priorities;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 d (new) (after title "Analysis of the concept of Territorial Cohesion") 10d. Underlines that territorial cohesion should not dilute or diminish the central objectives of cohesion policy, particularly at economic and social level, and that it should instead help to reinforce these objectives, by promoting the convergence of Member States and regions which are lagging behind in their development;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 e (new) (after title "Analysis of the concept of Territorial Cohesion") 10e. Underlines that land management and planning are responsibilities of the Member States;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Endorses the position of the Green Paper that territorial cohesion is about ensuring the harmonious development of places with different characteristics and specificities, and about making sure that their citizens are able to make the most of inherent features of different territories; places emphasis on the fact that territorial cohesion is a horizontal concept that underpins the development of the Union as a whole
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Endorses the position of the Green Paper that territorial cohesion is about ensuring the
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Endorses the position of the Green Paper that territorial cohesion, based on the principle of equal opportunities, is about ensuring the harmonious development of places with different characteristics and specificities, and about making sure that their citizens are able to make the most of inherent features of different territories; places emphasis on the fact that territorial cohesion is a horizontal concept that underpins the development of the Union as a whole by turning diversity into an asset of all its regions; strongly believes that territorial cohesion should prevent the prospect of an asymmetric Union;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Endorses the position of the Green Paper that territorial cohesion is about ensuring the harmonious development of places with different characteristics and specificities
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Endorses the position of the Green Paper that territorial cohesion is about ensuring the harmonious development of places with different characteristics and specificities, and about making sure that their citizens are able to make the most of inherent features of different territories; places emphasis on the fact that territorial cohesion is a horizontal concept that underpins the development of the Union as a whole by turning diversity into an asset of all its regions; strongly believes that territorial cohesion should prevent the prospect of an asymmetric Union; asserts that territorial cohesion has both a land and a maritime dimension;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Considers that territorial cohesion can be defined in terms of three dimensions: - equalisation of territorial imbalances through structural assistance and development of endogenous regional potential, - horizontal and vertical integration of specialist policies with relevance to regional planning, - partnership between public, private and civil-society actors in their regional planning cooperation;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Underlines the importance of territorial cohesion as a political objective, broadening the Community’s capacity to strengthen solidarity in the European Union and make an effective contribution to sustainable development and tackling climate change, while respecting the principle of subsidiarity and the division of competences among the different levels of government;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B a (new) Ba. whereas the French Council Presidency put forward a proposal for the definition of territorial cohesion during the informal meeting of the Council of Ministers in Marseille on 26 November 2008;
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11b. Notes the proposal for a definition put forward by the French Council Presidency; reaffirms its objective that citizens must be offered equal opportunities for development and quality of life and undertakings must be offered fair prospects for development based on their specific geographic competences;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Believes that territorial cohesion is a distinct concept that should
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Believes that territorial cohesion is a distinct concept that should provide tangible added value to economic and social cohesion; stresses that the three component parts of cohesion (economic,
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Believes that territorial cohesion is a
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Recalls that, on the ground, the concept of territorial cohesion frequently comes up against divisions between public authorities at national, regional and local levels and that these geographical and administrative boundaries do not necessarily correspond to the appropriate area of intervention; calls on the Commission and the Member States to take citizens' needs as their starting point, taking account of the relevant basic territorial units when addressing issues of fundamental importance to their daily lives such as population and labour catchment areas;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Affirms that the aim of territorial cohesion is to give Europeans equal opportunities in terms of quality of life, with each Community territory aspiring to offer its citizens fair - but not necessarily equal - access to ‘basic’ infrastructure and services of general and general economic interest; this will enable citizens to live in decent conditions in line with 21st century European standards of living;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 b (new) 12b. Underlines that the notion of territorial cohesion is based on the principle of solidarity, in particular territorial solidarity, which requires equalisation mechanisms between Member States, between regions and within regions;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Welcomes the conclusions of the research by ESPON on future development scenarios for the European territory until 2030, which bring tangible data in support of the policy debate on the shape of EU and national policies, so as to create the right instruments to
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Welcomes the conclusions of the research by ESPON on future development scenarios for the European territory until 2030, which bring tangible data in support of the policy debate on the shape of EU and national policies, so as to create the right instruments to avoid polarisation and depopulation of EU territories and develop optimal conditions for a quality life for their citizens; also welcomes the publication of the Commission's 'Regions 2020 - an assessment of future challenges for EU regions';
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Emphasizes that one of the main objectives of territorial cohesion is to ensure that
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B b (new) Bb. whereas the EU’s cohesion policy remains an essential pillar in the process of European integration, and plays an active role in reducing development deficits and disparities;
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Emphasi
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Emphasizes that one of the main objectives of territorial cohesion is to ensure that progress and growth generated in one specific territory should provide
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Emphasi
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Recalls the important role played by small, micro and craft businesses in particular, in economic, social and territorial cohesion through their significant contribution to growth and employment; therefore calls for the implementation of an active policy to support all forms of innovation in these enterprises and also invites the Commission to create opportunities for mutual co-operation between businesses, the public sector, schools and universities, in order to create regional innovation clusters, in the spirit of the Lisbon Strategy;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Emphasises the single market's vital contribution to economic, social and territorial cohesion; stresses the importance of public services in relation to sustainable economic and social development as well as the need for socially and regionally equitable access to services of general interest;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Emphasises th
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Emphasises the single market’s vital contribution to economic, social and territorial cohesion; stresses the importance of public services in relation to sustainable economic and social development as well as the need for socially and regionally equitable access to services of general interest, especially public education and health services; takes the view that in light of the subsidiarity principle and of EU competition law, responsibility for defining, organising, financing and monitoring services of general interest should rest with the national, regional and local authorities; considers however that a reflection on the fair access for citizens to services should be included in the debate on the territorial cohesion, the improvement in cross-border cooperation in this field and the need to have a clear and effective definition of the degree of freedom that Member States and their local and regional authorities have in managing their public service obligations (aid payments, public procurement management, etc.);
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Emphasises the single market's vital contribution to economic, social and territorial cohesion, provided it furthers the interests of European citizens; stresses the importance of public services in relation to sustainable economic and social development as well as the need for socially and regionally
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Emphasises the vital importance of small, medium-sized and micro enterprises for competitiveness and job creation in the regions, where they play an essential role in maintaining cohesion and economic and social stability; considers it essential that the objective of future development policies of the regions should be to increase the competitiveness of all businesses, including those operating on local markets and in traditional sectors, not just the most successful or fast-growing companies; urges the Commission to ensure that organisations representing the various types of SMEs participate directly in the definition and implementation of territorial policies and calls on the Member States and the regions to do the same at their level;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Stresses that territorial cohesion must be subject to the subsidiarity principle in all areas since the regions are best placed to decide how and where the EU funds should be deployed.
source: PE-416.601
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2015-01-08Show (4) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/committees/0/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
545fca37d1d1c5177a000000New
4f1ada05b819f207b300004b |
| activities/2/committees/0/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
545fca37d1d1c5177a000000New
4f1ada05b819f207b300004b |
| committees/0/rapporteur/0/mepref |
Old
545fca37d1d1c5177a000000New
4f1ada05b819f207b300004b |
| procedure/subject/1 |
Old
4.70.02 Cohesion, Cohesion FundNew
4.70.02 Cohesion policy, Cohesion Fund |
2014-11-10Show (5) Changes
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|