Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | REGI | OLEJNICZAK Wojciech Michał ( S&D) | ZELLER Joachim ( PPE), PAKARINEN Riikka ( ALDE), ALFONSI François ( Verts/ALE), KURSKI Jacek Olgierd ( ECR) |
Committee Opinion | AFET | BIELAN Adam ( ECR) | Anneli JÄÄTTEENMÄKI ( ALDE), Tunne KELAM ( PPE), Indrek TARAND ( Verts/ALE) |
Committee Opinion | ENVI | ROSBACH Anna ( EFD) | |
Committee Opinion | TRAN | KUHN Werner ( PPE) | |
Committee Opinion | ITRE |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Subjects
Events
The Commission presents a report on the Implementation of the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region (EUSBSR) adopted by the European Commission in June 2009 (see COM(2009)0248) and endorsed by the European Council in October 2009. The report follows the 2010 interim review, discussed with a wide range of stakeholders at the Annual Forum in Tallinn on 14-15 October 2010. Since the Strategy is a dynamic innovative process that needs time, this report includes recommendations for improvements in the years to come. It also serves as inspiration for the EU Strategy for the Danube Region, and for other possible future initiatives, including those with a similar or greater maritime dimension.
The Strategy addresses key challenges and untapped potential of this large region, covering about one third of the total area of the EU with almost 85 million inhabitants (17% of EU population). It provides an integrated framework for improving the environmental condition of this shallow enclosed sea, tackling transport bottlenecks and energy interconnections. It facilitates development of markets across borders, as well as common networks for research, innovation and enterprise. With these concrete steps, the Strategy contributes significantly to such major EU policies as Europe 2020 and the Integrated Maritime Policy , as well as reinforcing the EU integration of the Region following enlargement.
Main achievements : the Strategy has led to concrete action, with a more streamlined use of resources. New working methods and networks have been established, and many initiatives developed. These comprise:
new projects : the report gives details of the many new projects have been developed and funded to fulfil the aims of the 15 Priority Areas set out in the Action Plan accompanying the Strategy. The projects listed in the report are just a few examples of the more than 80 Flagship Projects being implemented under the Action Plan. Other projects respond to the whole spectrum of interlinked challenges in the Region, such as developing marine protected areas, (making the Baltic Sea the first maritime region worldwide to reach the target of the Convention of Biological Diversity of designating at least 10% of its area as protected). Other projects address further topics in a Baltic-wide cooperative approach, such as the control of hazardous substances, the removal of single market barriers and the enhancement of cooperation among some 200 regional universities, new momentum to existing projects : the Strategy builds on experiences of past cooperation and existing projects. It provides increased visibility, expanded networks, and clearer direct links to national and European policy making, and also ensures focus and economies of scale. This is done by clustering projects sharing similar themes. new and developing networks : the Strategy provides a common reference point for the many organisations in the Baltic Sea Region. Increasingly, people and structures are basing their work on the priorities set out in the Action Plan. policy development and coherence : the integrated way of working also encourages better policy development and alignment, along with a more efficient implementation of existing approaches. It also means ensuring that sectoral policies – including transport, education, energy and climate, environment, fisheries, industry, innovation, health and agricultural policies – are coherent and suited to the needs of the Baltic Sea Region as a whole. alignment of funding and other financial initiatives : alignment of available funding with the Strategy is key to the success of the implementation process. Focusing the efforts of Cohesion Policy, which alone makes some EUR 50 billion available for the Baltic Sea Region, along with major EU and national funding sources, has been a challenge. The report gives details of the advances that have been made and notes that the Commission and the European Investment Bank (EIB) are assessing the potential of a joint Implementation Facility. cooperation with non-EU Member States in the Baltic Sea Region : the three countries most concerned, Russia, Norway and Belarus, have all indicated their support. The report gives particular details of cooperation with Russia. Cooperation with non-Member States within the framework of the Strategy has been bolstered by EUR 20 million in the 2010 EU budget, at the initiative of the European Parliament. It is primarily for environmental projects, via the Northern Dimension Environmental Partnership and HELCOM.
Recommendations: overall, it is clear that the Strategy is a new way of bringing multiple partners and policy areas together to achieve more than any could do alone. For its part, based on the experience reported here, the Commission recommends:
reinforcing the integrated nature of the Strategy through closer alignment with the themes and flagships of Europe 2020;
ensure the European nature of the Strategy through regular discussions of the Strategy at policy Councils;
prioritising work on establishing targets to make the Strategy more focused and more concrete as regards to its main aims;
maximising efforts to align Cohesion Policy and other funding sources in the Region with the objectives of the Strategy;
strengthening implementation structures (especially Priority Area Coordinators and their steering groups) both financially and in terms of staff. National coordination committees should be set up, and national contacts for each Priority Area should be identified. Structures need to be thoroughly embedded in ministries and/or other relevant bodies;
developing a "Communication initiative" to ensure broader participation in the Strategy, as well as understanding of its achievements.
In addition, the Commission will continue its work on identifying the value-added of this new macro-regional approach, which could be based on an external evaluation of the Strategy's impact. Its conclusions will be incorporated into the report on the macro-regional strategy concept, which the Council has requested for June 2013, drawing on the best possible analysis of the experience gained. These recommendations require more high-level input from all stakeholders. The Commission believes that the achievements and appreciation of the Strategy so far justify this further effort.
The European Parliament adopted a resolution on the European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and the role of macro-regions in the future cohesion policy.
Members welcome the approval of the European Commission and the support of the Council for the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region, which Parliament has been calling for since 2006. They welcome the fact that the Strategy is the result of broad consultation with interested parties in the Member States, including not only national, regional and local authorities but also the academic and business communities as well as NGOs.
Whilst welcoming the establishment of a civil society forum in the region, the resolution recommends, in this context, increasing the local communities’ involvement by setting up wider and more focused communication and consultation tools. The Commission is called upon to create a special web portal devoted to the Baltic Sea Strategy, which would act as a forum for the exchange of experiences regarding current and future projects.
Pilot project : Members consider that the Strategy should be used as a pilot project future macro-regional strategies and the Strategy's success can be a model for the way in which future strategies can be implemented. It emphasises the idea of creating functional regions, focused around joint objectives and development problems, can lead to an increase in the effectiveness of EU regional policy.
The resolution states that the overriding goal is to find optimal mechanisms that can be transferred to future macro-regional strategies .
Parliament believes that the Strategy’s territorial dimension will lead to the concrete development of the idea of territorial cohesion, which the Treaty of Lisbon places on an equal footing with economic and social cohesion, and with this in mind calls on the Commission to engage in active dialogue on the role and impact of EU macro-regional policies after 2013 .
The use of Structural Funds : the resolution calls on the Member States and regions to take advantage of the Structural Funds available for 2007-2013 in order to ensure maximum support for the Strategy, in particular to promote job creation and economic growth in areas most affected by the economic crisis. It notes that implementation of the Baltic Sea Strategy has as yet been very slow. It considers that the appropriations earmarked in the 2010 EU budget may be used to improve implementation and reminds the Commission of the importance of this money being allocated as soon as possible for purposes in line with the targets of the Baltic Sea Strategy.
External dimension : Parliament calls for improvement, in the context of the Strategy for Baltic Sea Region as well as of the future macro-regional strategies, of the relations between the European Union and the non-EU states , particularly in the implementation of large-scale projects with significant environmental impact. Furthermore, they call for cooperation between the EU and non-EU states to strengthen security within the region and support the fight against cross-border crime.
The resolution draws attention to the need to seek greater cooperation particularly between Russia and Belarus, and the Baltic States when constructing the energy network, and to take greater advantage of the energy dialogue between the EU and Russia for this purpose, which would at the same time open up opportunities for involving Russia in the Baltic Sea Strategy.
Stressing the need to reduce the region’s dependence on Russian energy , Members welcome the European Commission’s statement on the need for more interconnections between Member States in the region and greater diversification of energy supplies. They call in this regard for increased support for the creation of LNG ports.
Members believe that the new Partnership and Cooperation Agreement with Russia should take account of the cooperation in the Baltic Sea Area. They believe that the EU-Russia common spaces will provide a valuable framework in this regard, and call on Russia to play an equal part in such cooperation. The resolution also considers that Baltic Sea Region Cooperation should be prioritised and should take place at the highest political level of Heads of State and Government, since it is crucial in driving forward cooperation between the Baltic Sea countries and ensuring that political ambitions are realised.
Environmental and energy aspects : the resolution emphasises the need for an environmental impact assessment of energy infrastructure projects (currently under construction and in the future), taking into account, in particular international conventions. It calls on the Commission to design an adequate reaction plan for technical accidents and any other possible catastrophes, providing also for ways of dealing with these events from an economic point of view.
Parliament emphasises the need to establish a Baltic Sea Environmental Monitoring Centre , an early-warning system for accidents and serious cross-border pollution, and a joint action force to deal with such situations.
The resolution draws attention to the strategic significance of the Baltic Sea region for the development of joint projects on energy infrastructure that improve diversification of energy production and supply. It also emphasises that, in view of the intended expansion of nuclear energy in the Baltic Sea region, EU countries have to follow the strictest safety and environmental standards and the European Commission has to watch and monitor whether the same approach and international conventions are followed in the neighbouring countries, especially in those which are planning to build nuclear power plants near external EU borders.
Recalling that the Baltic Sea is one of the most polluted sea areas in the world, Parliament emphasises the need for the EU and its Member States surrounding the Baltic Sea Region urgently to address the serious environmental problems affecting the Region , principal among which are eutrophication, the impact of hazardous substances deposited on the seabed and threats to aquatic biodiversity, with particular regard to endangered fish populations.
Transport and tourism aspects : Parliament emphasises that it is a priority to create an effective and environmentally friendly sea, land and inland transport and communication network , taking account of the provisions of the updated version of the Natura 2000 document and paying particular attention to links between the Baltic Sea region and other European regions through the Baltic-Adriatic Corridor and the Central European Transport Corridor.
The resolution highlights the following issues:
this strategy should, inter alia, help to address the lack of appropriate infrastructure and accessibility, as well as low interoperability between various national transport networks owing to different technical systems and administrative barriers, in order to develop a comprehensive multimodal transport system across the Baltic Sea Region; the importance of integrating the Baltic Sea Region more closely into the TEN-T priority axes , in particular with regard to the Motorways of the Sea, extending the rail axis from Berlin to the Baltic coast, improving the rail axis from Berlin to the Baltic coast in combination with the Rostock-Denmark Seaway connection, and making more rapid progress in upgrading and using the Rail Baltica axis; the need to complete the interconnections between the Baltic Sea Region and other European regions via the Baltic-Adriatic corridor; it is important to enhance the Baltic Sea Region’s transport capacity towards the east, in particular in order to promote transport interoperability, especially for railways, and to speed up freight transit at the borders of the European Union; themes such as water sports , wellness and spa tourism, the cultural heritage and landscapes to offer great potential for developing the region’s profile as a tourist destination. Members stress, therefore, the need to protect natural coastal areas, landscapes and the cultural heritage as a resource for ensuring a sustainable economy in the Baltic Sea Region in the future; improvements in transport links and the elimination of bottlenecks should be of no less importance (border-crossing difficulties at checkpoints on the EU’s eastern border with the Russian Federation) could be solved via this strategy in order to ensure the smooth flow of goods through the Baltic Sea Region.
Lastly, Parliament welcomes the inclusion in the Commission’s action plan of the objective of making the Baltic Sea a model region for clean shipping and a world leader in maritime safety and security.
The Committee on Regional Development adopted an own-initiative report drafted by Wojciech Michał OLEJNICZAK (S&D, PL) on the European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and the role of macro-regions in the future cohesion policy, in response to the Commission communication on the same subject.
Members welcome the approval of the European Commission and the support of the Council for the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region, which Parliament has been calling for since 2006. They welcome the fact that the Strategy is the result of broad consultation with interested parties in the Member States and welcome, in this regard, the establishment of a civil society forum in the region such as the Baltic Sea Action Summit. The Commission is called upon to create a special web portal devoted to the Baltic Sea Strategy, which would act as a forum for the exchange of experiences regarding current and future projects.
The committee calls on the Member States and regions to take advantage of the Structural Funds available for 2007-2013 in order to ensure maximum support for the Strategy, in particular to promote job creation and economic growth in areas most affected by the economic crisis. It notes that implementation of the Baltic Sea Strategy has as yet been very slow. It considers that the appropriations earmarked in the 2010 EU budget may be used to improve implementation and reminds the Commission of the importance of this money being allocated as soon as possible for purposes in line with the targets of the Baltic Sea Strategy.
The report states that the overriding goal is to find optimal mechanisms that can be transferred to future macro-regional strategies . Members point to the need to promote new areas with development and innovation potential and to take the opportunity of using the added value of the Baltic Sea Strategy and other future macro-regional strategies to reach new level of synergy which can reduce existing disparities.
The European Commission is called upon to analyse the first results and experiences in connection with the implementation of the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region, which will help to map out possible sources and methods for financing macro-regional strategies and help in using the example of the Strategy as a pilot project for other macro-regional strategies to demonstrate their functionality.
Members believe that the Strategy’s territorial dimension will lead to the concrete development of the idea of territorial cohesion, which the Treaty of Lisbon places on an equal footing with economic and social cohesion, and with this in mind calls on the Commission to engage in active dialogue on the role and impact of EU macro-regional policies after 2013 .
External dimension : Members call for improvement, in the context of the Strategy for Baltic Sea Region as well as of the future macro-regional strategies, of the relations between the European Union and the non-EU states, particularly in the implementation of large-scale projects with significant environmental impact. Furthermore, they call for cooperation between the EU and non-EU states to strengthen security within the region and support the fight against cross-border crime.
The report draws attention to the need to seek greater cooperation particularly between Russia and Belarus, and the Baltic States when constructing the energy network, and to take greater advantage of the energy dialogue between the EU and Russia for this purpose, which would at the same time open up opportunities for involving Russia in the Baltic Sea Strategy.
Stressing the need to reduce the region’s dependence on Russian energy , Members welcome the European Commission’s statement on the need for more interconnections between Member States in the region and greater diversification of energy supplies. They call in this regard for increased support for the creation of LNG ports.
Members believe that the new Partnership and Cooperation Agreement with Russia should take account of the cooperation in the Baltic Sea Area. They believe that the EU-Russia common spaces will provide a valuable framework in this regard, and call on Russia to play an equal part in such cooperation. The report also considers that Baltic Sea Region Cooperation should be prioritised and should take place at the highest political level of Heads of State and Government, since it is crucial in driving forward cooperation between the Baltic Sea countries and ensuring that political ambitions are realised.
Environmental and energy aspects : the report emphasises the need for an environmental impact assessment of energy infrastructure projects (currently under construction and in the future), taking into account, in particular international conventions. It calls on the Commission to design an adequate reaction plan for technical accidents and any other possible catastrophes, providing also for ways of dealing with these events from an economic point of view.
Members emphasise the need to establish a Baltic Sea Environmental Monitoring Centre , an early-warning system for accidents and serious cross-border pollution, and a joint action force to deal with such situations.
The report draws attention to the strategic significance of the Baltic Sea region for the development of joint projects on energy infrastructure that improve diversification of energy production and supply. It also emphasises that, in view of the intended expansion of nuclear energy in the Baltic Sea region, EU countries have to follow the strictest safety and environmental standards and the European Commission has to watch and monitor whether the same approach and international conventions are followed in the neighbouring countries, especially in those which are planning to build nuclear power plants near external EU borders.
Recalling that the Baltic Sea is one of the most polluted sea areas in the world, Members emphasise the need for the EU and its Member States surrounding the Baltic Sea Region urgently to address the serious environmental problems affecting the Region , principal among which are eutrophication, the impact of hazardous substances deposited on the seabed and threats to aquatic biodiversity, with particular regard to endangered fish populations.
Transport and tourism aspects : Members emphasise that it is a priority to create an effective and environmentally friendly sea, land and inland transport and communication network , taking account of the provisions of the updated version of the Natura 2000 document and paying particular attention to links between the Baltic Sea region and other European regions through the Baltic-Adriatic Corridor and the Central European Transport Corridor.
The report highlights the following issues:
this strategy should, inter alia, help to address the lack of appropriate infrastructure and accessibility, as well as low interoperability between various national transport networks owing to different technical systems and administrative barriers, in order to develop a comprehensive multimodal transport system across the Baltic Sea Region; the importance of integrating the Baltic Sea Region more closely into the TEN-T priority axes , in particular with regard to the Motorways of the Sea, extending the rail axis from Berlin to the Baltic coast, improving the rail axis from Berlin to the Baltic coast in combination with the Rostock-Denmark Seaway connection, and making more rapid progress in upgrading and using the Rail Baltica axis; the need to complete the interconnections between the Baltic Sea Region and other European regions via the Baltic-Adriatic corridor; it is important to enhance the Baltic Sea Region’s transport capacity towards the east, in particular in order to promote transport interoperability, especially for railways, and to speed up freight transit at the borders of the European Union; themes such as water sports , wellness and spa tourism, the cultural heritage and landscapes to offer great potential for developing the region’s profile as a tourist destination. Members stress, therefore, the need to protect natural coastal areas, landscapes and the cultural heritage as a resource for ensuring a sustainable economy in the Baltic Sea Region in the future; improvements in transport links and the elimination of bottlenecks should be of no less importance (border-crossing difficulties at checkpoints on the EU’s eastern border with the Russian Federation) could be solved via this strategy in order to ensure the smooth flow of goods through the Baltic Sea Region.
Lastly, Members welcome the inclusion in the Commission’s action plan of the objective of making the Baltic Sea a model region for clean shipping and a world leader in maritime safety and security.
PURPOSE : Communication concerning the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region.
CONTEXT : eight of the nine states bordering the Baltic Sea are members of the EU. The introduction of Community rules, and the opportunities created by Community instruments and policies (for example cohesion policy, the strategy for sustainable development, environmental policy, the integrated maritime policy, the internal market and the Lisbon Agenda) have opened important new possibilities for a more effective co-ordination of activities, thus delivering higher standards of living for the citizens of these Member States. However, full advantage of the new opportunities that EU membership provides has not yet been taken and the challenges facing the region have not yet been adequately addressed.
Recognising this, the European Parliament published a report in late 2006 calling for a strategy for the Baltic Sea Region, and the European Council in 2007 invited the Commission to present a EU strategy for the Baltic Sea region.
This Communication presents the strategy requested by the European Council. The strategy seeks to provide both a co-ordinated, inclusive framework in response to the key challenges facing the Baltic Sea Region and concrete solutions to these challenges. It should be read with the indicative action plan.
CONTENT : The action plan is organised around four pillars. The individual actions and flagship projects have been selected for their fast implementation and impact.
The four pillars are:
An environmentally sustainable region : available data suggest that pressures such as pollution by nutrients, predominantly nitrates and phosphates, cannot easily be absorbed but have rapid and visible impacts. The Action Plan covers the following priority areas:
to reduce nutrient inputs to the sea to acceptable levels; to preserve natural zones and biodiversity including fisheries; to reduce the use and impact of hazardous substances; to become a model region for clean shipping; to mitigate and adapt to climate change.
A prosperous region : due to small national markets in the Baltic, it is essential to upgrade the business environment to stimulate development of local enterprises and attract foreign investors. Despite the internal market, practical obstacles to trade in goods and services still exist. Transfer of knowledge and competence and deepened cooperation from the Nordic countries and Germany can greatly help Poland and the Baltic States to continue catching up.
The Action Plan covers the following priority areas:
to remove hindrances to the internal market in the Baltic Sea Region; to exploit the full potential of the region in research and innovation; implementing the Small Business Act and promote entrepreneurship, strengthen SMEs and increase the efficient use of human resources; to reinforce sustainable agriculture, forestry and fishing.
An accessible and attractive region : Northern Finland, Sweden and the Baltic States, have the lowest accessibility rates in the whole of Europe in both internal and external relations. The causes are the large size of the region, resulting in long travel distances and times, and difficult geographical and climate conditions. Low infrastructure or service density implies high prices. Improvements must be through sustainable modes of transport. The paper also discusses the energy markets. The latter lacks appropriate infrastructures and are too nationally oriented instead of being linked across the region. This creates higher energy supply risks and prices. In addition, for the internal energy market to function well, countries need to be interconnected. However, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania remain, with the exception of the Estlink power cable between Estonia and Finland, essentially isolated from the wider energy networks of the EU.
The Action Plan covers the following priority areas:
to improve the access to, and the efficiency and security of, the energy markets; to improve internal and external transport links; to maintain and reinforce the attractiveness of the Baltic Sea Region in particular through education, tourism and health.
A safe and secure region : the main issues are marine pollution and cross-border crime. Due to its strategic position, the Baltic Sea Region is a natural route for oil transport, and there is also an increasing trend towards transport of liquefied natural gas. These activities carry risks for the environment. In 2007 there were 120 ship accidents in the Baltic Sea. Further actions are still needed to improve maritime safety and surveillance agencies and disaster response.
The paper goes on to discuss the region's crime patterns, which are influenced by its geographical location, differing economic and social conditions, differences in prices of excisable products, along with the openness and ease of access within the Baltic Sea Region that is a feature of intra- Community relations. The Action Plan covers the following priority areas:
to become a leading region in maritime safety and security; to reinforce protection from major emergencies at sea and on land; to decrease the volume of, and harm done by, cross border crime.
Horizontal actions : a number of cross-cutting actions are fundamental to the entire strategy. These include the development of integrated maritime governance structures and maritime and land-based spatial planning. The BONUS-169 project combining an ecosystem approach with an effective science/policy interface funded under FP7 is central to the success of the strategy.
Governance and implementation proposals : the paper discusses the need for a flexible approach in view of the wide range of actions, and makes the following proposals:
policy development : general oversight will be within Community structures, with periodic reports and proposals for recommendations from the Commission to the Council. The Commission will be responsible for co-ordination, monitoring, reporting, facilitation of the implementation and follow-up. In partnership with the stakeholders of the region, it should prepare regular progress reports, and use its power of initiative to make proposals for adaptation of the strategy and action plan whenever these are required. The Commission will work in partnership with the other institutions, Member States and regions, international financing institutions, and intergovernmental organisations such as HELCOM to identify co-ordinating bodies at the level of priority areas and lead partners for flagship projects. There will be an annual forum to bring together partners concerned with different aspects of the strategy. Relations with third countries should be conducted primarily through the Northern Dimension with the option to use alternative channels when useful; practical implementation : these arrangements will encourage efficient policy co-ordination, more effective application of Community legislation and better co-ordination of funding instruments. The Commission is not proposing additional funding or other resources at this time. However, some of the specific actions and projects will require financial support. A major source is the Structural Funds available in the region – most programmes already allow actions envisaged in the strategy. Programming authorities can review the allocation criteria and facilitate the selection of projects aligned with the strategy. Furthermore, the Commission will welcome appropriate modifications of the programmes where necessary.
Funding : Member States have agreed to examine funding projects and actions aligned with the Strategy priorities from their own resources. The European Investment Bank and other international and regional financial institutions, such as the Nordic Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, could also contribute.
PURPOSE : Communication concerning the EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region.
CONTEXT : eight of the nine states bordering the Baltic Sea are members of the EU. The introduction of Community rules, and the opportunities created by Community instruments and policies (for example cohesion policy, the strategy for sustainable development, environmental policy, the integrated maritime policy, the internal market and the Lisbon Agenda) have opened important new possibilities for a more effective co-ordination of activities, thus delivering higher standards of living for the citizens of these Member States. However, full advantage of the new opportunities that EU membership provides has not yet been taken and the challenges facing the region have not yet been adequately addressed.
Recognising this, the European Parliament published a report in late 2006 calling for a strategy for the Baltic Sea Region, and the European Council in 2007 invited the Commission to present a EU strategy for the Baltic Sea region.
This Communication presents the strategy requested by the European Council. The strategy seeks to provide both a co-ordinated, inclusive framework in response to the key challenges facing the Baltic Sea Region and concrete solutions to these challenges. It should be read with the indicative action plan.
CONTENT : The action plan is organised around four pillars. The individual actions and flagship projects have been selected for their fast implementation and impact.
The four pillars are:
An environmentally sustainable region : available data suggest that pressures such as pollution by nutrients, predominantly nitrates and phosphates, cannot easily be absorbed but have rapid and visible impacts. The Action Plan covers the following priority areas:
to reduce nutrient inputs to the sea to acceptable levels; to preserve natural zones and biodiversity including fisheries; to reduce the use and impact of hazardous substances; to become a model region for clean shipping; to mitigate and adapt to climate change.
A prosperous region : due to small national markets in the Baltic, it is essential to upgrade the business environment to stimulate development of local enterprises and attract foreign investors. Despite the internal market, practical obstacles to trade in goods and services still exist. Transfer of knowledge and competence and deepened cooperation from the Nordic countries and Germany can greatly help Poland and the Baltic States to continue catching up.
The Action Plan covers the following priority areas:
to remove hindrances to the internal market in the Baltic Sea Region; to exploit the full potential of the region in research and innovation; implementing the Small Business Act and promote entrepreneurship, strengthen SMEs and increase the efficient use of human resources; to reinforce sustainable agriculture, forestry and fishing.
An accessible and attractive region : Northern Finland, Sweden and the Baltic States, have the lowest accessibility rates in the whole of Europe in both internal and external relations. The causes are the large size of the region, resulting in long travel distances and times, and difficult geographical and climate conditions. Low infrastructure or service density implies high prices. Improvements must be through sustainable modes of transport. The paper also discusses the energy markets. The latter lacks appropriate infrastructures and are too nationally oriented instead of being linked across the region. This creates higher energy supply risks and prices. In addition, for the internal energy market to function well, countries need to be interconnected. However, Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania remain, with the exception of the Estlink power cable between Estonia and Finland, essentially isolated from the wider energy networks of the EU.
The Action Plan covers the following priority areas:
to improve the access to, and the efficiency and security of, the energy markets; to improve internal and external transport links; to maintain and reinforce the attractiveness of the Baltic Sea Region in particular through education, tourism and health.
A safe and secure region : the main issues are marine pollution and cross-border crime. Due to its strategic position, the Baltic Sea Region is a natural route for oil transport, and there is also an increasing trend towards transport of liquefied natural gas. These activities carry risks for the environment. In 2007 there were 120 ship accidents in the Baltic Sea. Further actions are still needed to improve maritime safety and surveillance agencies and disaster response.
The paper goes on to discuss the region's crime patterns, which are influenced by its geographical location, differing economic and social conditions, differences in prices of excisable products, along with the openness and ease of access within the Baltic Sea Region that is a feature of intra- Community relations. The Action Plan covers the following priority areas:
to become a leading region in maritime safety and security; to reinforce protection from major emergencies at sea and on land; to decrease the volume of, and harm done by, cross border crime.
Horizontal actions : a number of cross-cutting actions are fundamental to the entire strategy. These include the development of integrated maritime governance structures and maritime and land-based spatial planning. The BONUS-169 project combining an ecosystem approach with an effective science/policy interface funded under FP7 is central to the success of the strategy.
Governance and implementation proposals : the paper discusses the need for a flexible approach in view of the wide range of actions, and makes the following proposals:
policy development : general oversight will be within Community structures, with periodic reports and proposals for recommendations from the Commission to the Council. The Commission will be responsible for co-ordination, monitoring, reporting, facilitation of the implementation and follow-up. In partnership with the stakeholders of the region, it should prepare regular progress reports, and use its power of initiative to make proposals for adaptation of the strategy and action plan whenever these are required. The Commission will work in partnership with the other institutions, Member States and regions, international financing institutions, and intergovernmental organisations such as HELCOM to identify co-ordinating bodies at the level of priority areas and lead partners for flagship projects. There will be an annual forum to bring together partners concerned with different aspects of the strategy. Relations with third countries should be conducted primarily through the Northern Dimension with the option to use alternative channels when useful; practical implementation : these arrangements will encourage efficient policy co-ordination, more effective application of Community legislation and better co-ordination of funding instruments. The Commission is not proposing additional funding or other resources at this time. However, some of the specific actions and projects will require financial support. A major source is the Structural Funds available in the region – most programmes already allow actions envisaged in the strategy. Programming authorities can review the allocation criteria and facilitate the selection of projects aligned with the strategy. Furthermore, the Commission will welcome appropriate modifications of the programmes where necessary.
Funding : Member States have agreed to examine funding projects and actions aligned with the Strategy priorities from their own resources. The European Investment Bank and other international and regional financial institutions, such as the Nordic Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, could also contribute.
Documents
- For information: SWD(2017)0118
- For information: SWD(2015)0177
- Follow-up document: SEC(2011)1071
- Follow-up document: EUR-Lex
- Follow-up document: COM(2011)0381
- Follow-up document: EUR-Lex
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2010)6850
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T7-0254/2010
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A7-0202/2010
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A7-0202/2010
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE441.310
- Committee opinion: PE439.837
- Committee opinion: PE438.455
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE440.046
- Committee opinion: PE438.378
- Committee draft report: PE439.338
- Non-legislative basic document: COM(2009)0248
- Non-legislative basic document: EUR-Lex
- Non-legislative basic document published: COM(2009)0248
- Non-legislative basic document published: EUR-Lex
- Non-legislative basic document: COM(2009)0248 EUR-Lex
- Committee draft report: PE439.338
- Committee opinion: PE438.378
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE440.046
- Committee opinion: PE438.455
- Committee opinion: PE439.837
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE441.310
- Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading: A7-0202/2010
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2010)6850
- Follow-up document: COM(2011)0381 EUR-Lex
- Follow-up document: SEC(2011)1071 EUR-Lex
- For information: SWD(2015)0177
- For information: SWD(2017)0118
Activities
Amendments | Dossier |
187 |
2009/2230(INI)
2010/03/03
TRAN
19 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Regards the inclusion of all coastal states as highly desirable in order to promote an efficient, interoperable pan- European transport area which
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Stresses, in this regard, the need for effective cross-border coordination and cooperation between rail, seaports, inland ports, hinterland terminals and logistics in order to develop a more sustainable intermodal transport system;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Underlines the importance of short sea shipping in the Baltic Sea and its contribution to an efficient, environmentally-friendly transport network; points out that the competitiveness of short sea shipping links must be ensured in order to support a modal shift from road to sea;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Emphasises that, in this region too, shipping must be made more environmentally friendly by applying stricter standards to local and global ship emission levels, while improving ships’ engines and the quality of their fuel;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Recognises the need for specific measures in support of this objective, including the appropriate use of nautical pilots or demonstrably experienced seafarers for the most challenging straits and ports and the establishment of reliable financing schemes for research and
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Calls on the Commission to strengthen its focus on innovation by supporting research and development for ships, using solar and wind energy in the Baltic Sea Region;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Underlines the unique opportunity for sustainable tourism offered by the attractiveness of the Hanseatic cities in the Baltic Region; supports, furthermore, the promotion of cross-border cycle tourism, thereby creating win-win effects for the environment and for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs);
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Considers themes such as watersports tourism, the cultural heritage and landscapes to offer great potential for developing the region's profile as a tourist destination; stresses, therefore, the need to protect natural coastal areas, landscapes and the cultural heritage as a resource for ensuring a sustainable economy in the Baltic Sea Region in the future;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 9 9. Considers themes such as water sports, wellness and spa tourism, the cultural heritage and landscapes to offer great potential for developing the region’s profile as a tourist destination;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 10 10. Regards improvements in transport links and the elimination of bottlenecks to be of no less importance
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Stresses the specific situation of the Baltic States, which to a large extent are currently isolated from the European transport network, and takes the view that this strategy should, inter alia, help to address the lack of appropriate infrastructure and accessibility, as well as low interoperability between various national transport networks owing to different technical systems and administrative barriers, in order to develop a comprehensive multimodal transport system across the Baltic Sea Region;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Emphasises the importance of integrating the Baltic Sea region more closely into the TEN-T priority axes, in particular with regard to the Motorways of the Sea (TEN-T 21), extension of the Gdansk-Vienna rail axis (TEN-T 23) to meet the Venice-Trieste Adriatic section of the TEN-T 6 axis, extension of the rail axis from Berlin to the Baltic Coast (TEN- T 1) and more rapid progress in developing the Rail Baltica axis;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Emphasises the importance of integrating the Baltic Sea region
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Emphasises the importance of integrating the Baltic Sea region more closely into the TEN-T priority axes, in particular with regard to the Motorways of the Sea (TEN-T 21), extension of the rail axis from Berlin to the Baltic coast (TEN-T 1) and more rapid progress in developing the Rail Baltica axis; also emphasises the need to support the interconnection of the Baltic Sea Region with other European regions via the Baltic-Adriatic corridor;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. emphasises the need for the development of a transport system in the Baltic Sea region in order to create conditions for the region’s accessibility and appeal and to connect the Baltic Sea region to the European transport network; believes that the Commission should continue to carry out regular reviews of the execution of priority projects, as well as to provide the necessary finances for their more rapid implementation;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Underlines that one of the common goals of the European Ports Policy is to make European sea ports more competitive, as they often face unfair competition from non-EU ports as well as discriminatory measures adopted in the relevant regional markets by countries adjoining the EU, and notes the situation of the Baltic Sea ports in this regard;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses that it is important to enhance the Baltic Sea region’s transport capacity towards the east, in particular in order to speed up freight transit at the border between the European Union and the Russian Federation;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Calls on the Member States to enhance cooperation with neighbouring countries, especially Russia, in order to promote interoperability within the transport sector, especially for railways;
source: PE-439.389
2010/03/16
ENVI
19 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises the need for the EU and
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises that that the construction of the Nord Stream gas pipeline is the most strategically significant project in the Region at present and
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises that that the construction of the Nord Stream gas pipeline is the most strategically significant project in the Region at present and will have far- reaching effects on its environment; thus regrets that the above-mentioned Strategy and Action Plan fail to deal specifically with the construction of the Nord Stream gas pipeline and
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Highlights the need for close cooperation among the countries of the Baltic Sea region, in accordance with the Espoo Convention, the Helsinki Convention and the Helsinki Commission guidelines, in connection with projects which may have a radical impact on the quality of the region’s environment;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls therefore, on the Commission and Member States urgently to take steps, in line with Parliament’s position set out in its resolution of 8 July 2008 on the environmental impact of the planned gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea to link up Russia and Germany, to ensure that projects under the Action Plan properly assess and mitigate the negative environmental effects of the gas pipeline scheme;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls therefore, on the Commission and Member States urgently to take steps to ensure that projects under the Action Plan properly assess and mitigate the negative environmental effects of the gas pipeline scheme; also considers that Nord Stream itself must be responsible for financing the measures needed to ensure that the Baltic Sea environment is not harmed as a result of the construction of the gas pipeline;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls therefore, on the Commission and Member States urgently to take steps to ensure that projects under the Action Plan properly assess and mitigate the negative environmental effects of the gas pipeline scheme; calls, at the same time, for projects which are unnecessary because they can be carried out on land to be avoided in future;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Considers that a ban on phosphates should be introduced as soon as possible throughout the EU; notes that such a measure could bring clear environmental benefits to the Baltic Sea and other areas;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Considers that Baltic Sea Region Cooperation should be prioritised and should take place at the highest political level of Heads of State and Government, since it is crucial in driving forward cooperation between the Baltic Sea countries and ensuring that political ambitions are realised; looks to see regular meetings between the Heads of State and Government in the Baltic Sea region seeking to achieve this;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Welcomes the creation of a separate budget line for the Baltic Sea Strategy in the EU budget; also welcomes the EUR 20 million earmarked for the Strategy in the 2010 budget; calls, however, for longer-term funding of the Strategy within the framework of the EU budget so as to finance measures which are not covered by the Structural Funds;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 c (new) 7c. Notes that implementation of the Baltic Sea Strategy has as yet been very slow; considers that the appropriations earmarked in the 2010 EU budget may be used to improve implementation; regrets, therefore, that these appropriations have still not been disbursed and reminds the Commission of the importance of this money being allocated as soon as possible for purposes in line with the targets of the Baltic Sea Strategy;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Emphasises the need for the EU and in particular its Member States surrounding the Baltic Sea Region, urgently to address the serious environmental problems affecting the Region, principal among which are eutrophication, the impact of hazardous substances deposited on the seabed and threats to aquatic biodiversity, with particular regard to endangered fish populations, such as cod;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Emphasises the need to identify the size and location of the toxic military gases dumped during World War II, together with plans for their disposal, and to assess the risk from projects on the Baltic seabed;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Emphasises the need to introduce a method common to all Member States for drawing up an inventory of sources of pollution and a plan for their gradual elimination;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Considers however, that despite the Strategy’s focus on the marine environment, projects under the Action Plan should also tackle and properly prioritise environmental issues affecting inland areas of the Region; calls, therefore, for centuries-old coastal communities engaged in traditional maritime activities to be protected and supported and for the coastal landscape and natural assets to be respected by, inter alia, introducing sustainable land-use plans and preventing excessive exploitation for tourism purposes;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Notes that nutrient loads from agriculture account to a great extent for the eutrophication of the Baltic Sea; insists therefore that as part of the Action Plan the Commission and Member States introduce measures that go beyond the rules currently contained in the Common Agricultural Policy in order significantly to reduce nutrient loads;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Considers that one of the most serious obstacles to realising the objectives of the Baltic Sea Strategy is the lack of consistency with other policy areas within the EU such as the Common Agricultural Policy which exacerbates eutrophication, and the Common Fisheries Policy which is not environmentally sustainable; considers that reforms to the CAP and the CFP must be made in such a way that they contribute to achieving the objective of an environmentally sustainable Baltic Sea area;
source: PE-439.901
2010/03/26
AFET
39 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Is convinced that the European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and the accompanying action plans proposed by the Commission will be more successful
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes that the Northern Dimension framework should provide
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes that the Northern Dimension framework should provide the main fundamental basis for the external aspects of cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region; underlines, in this context, the importance of close cooperation with Norway, Belarus and in particular Russia, the only non-EU country with direct access to the Baltic Sea;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes that the Northern Dimension framework should provide the main fundamental basis for the external aspects of cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region; underlines, in this context, the importance of close cooperation with Norway, Belarus and in particular Russia, the only non-EU country with direct access to the Baltic Sea; specifically notes the status of the Kaliningrad Oblast enclave, which is surrounded by EU Member States; calls for concrete and wideranging pilot projects with strict timetables; further underlines that there is no need for new bureaucratic structures;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Emphasises the need to stimulate social and economic development in the Kaliningrad region as a ‘gate-way’ or ‘pilot’ region for further EU-Russia relationship; calls on Russia to come up with the new proposal for the EU- Russia local border traffic facilitation agreement; underlines the strategic importance of EU-Russia cooperation in the Baltic Sea region on energy efficiency, energy saving and renewable energy;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Believes that new instruments promoting EU-Russia cooperation within the framework of the external dimension of the Baltic Sea Strategy should be developed, involving non-governmental organisations, local and regional authorities and institutions of education and culture; calls in this context for enhanced cooperation with north-west regions of Russia;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3.
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that cooperation with Russia
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that cooperation with Russia could be stepped up;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that cooperation with Russia could be stepped up; welcomes, therefore, the intention of the Commission and the
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that cooperation with Russia could be stepped up; welcomes, therefore, the intention of the Commission and the Member States in the region to have a renewed engagement, and cooperation, with Russia on a vast number of areas, such as transport connections, energy, customs and border controls; believes that the EU-Russia common spaces will provide a valuable framework in this regard;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Is convinced that the success of the European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and the accompanying action plans proposed by the Commission w
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that cooperation with Russia could be stepped up; welcomes, therefore,
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that cooperation with Russia could be stepped up; welcomes, therefore, the intention of the Commission and the Member States in the region to have a renewed engagement with Russia on a vast number of areas, such as transport connections, environment, customs and border controls; believes that the EU- Russia common spaces will provide a valuable framework in this regard;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Believes that cooperation with Russia could be stepped up; welcomes, therefore, the intention of the Commission and the
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Underlines the importance of the region for the energy security of Europe and calls for the development of EU projects aimed at improving energy links between Member States in the area;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses the need to reduce the region's dependency on Russian energy; welcomes the statement of the European Commission on the need for more interconnections between Member States in the region and greater diversification of energy supplies; calls in this regard for increased support for the creation of LNG ports;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Expresses its concern with the ongoing implementation of the Nord Stream Project; calls on the Commission to fulfil the obligations put forward in the resolution of the European Parliament of 8 July 20081 on the environmental impact of the planned gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea to link up Russia and Germany;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 c (new) Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes that the amount of EUR 20 million earmarked in the 2010 EU budget for the Baltic Sea Strategy can be used only for external action
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes that the amount of EUR 20 million earmarked in the 2010 EU budget for the Baltic Sea Strategy can be used
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes that the amount of EUR 20 million earmarked in the 2010 EU budget for the Baltic Sea Strategy can be used only for external action, which effectively means cooperation with Russia; although it is agreed that the Strategy shall be financed only within the limits of available funds, calls not to rule out the possibility of finding additional financial resources, notably through the European Investment Bank and the Nordic Investment Bank;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes that the amount of EUR 20 million earmarked in the 2010 EU budget for the Baltic Sea Strategy
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes that the amount of EUR 20 million earmarked in the 2010 EU budget specifically for the Baltic Sea Strategy can be used only for external action, which effectively means cooperation with Russia; calls to move future funds allocated to the Baltic Sea Strategy to Chapter 1 of the EU budget in order to make them available also for internal projects;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Notes that the amount of EUR 20 million earmarked in the 2010 EU budget for the Baltic Sea Strategy can be used
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Notes a deep impact of the global financial and economic crisis on all countries in the region, in particular the Baltic states; calls on all stakeholders not to weaken their commitment to the EU Baltic Sea Strategy because of the crisis;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Notes that in the current strategy there is no mention of the strategic importance of the large rivers in the Baltic macro- region and asks therefore the Commission to address this deficiency at the earliest possible;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Regrets however, that the earmarked funds for the Baltic Sea Strategy has not yet been disbursed by the Commission; reminds therefore the Commission on the importance of the funds being disbursed and used in lines with the requests from the European Parliament;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Is convinced that the success of any EU policy such as the Baltic Sea Strategy will be measured in terms of practical results which must be visible and tangible for the citizens, and considering the severity of the environmental, infrastructure-related and other challenges facing the Baltic a better involvement of organised civil society is critical;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Reiterates, in this regard, that in order to make cross-border projects more effective Russia should swiftly incorporate international best practice on transparency and public accountability into national legislation and sign the Espoo convention (on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context);
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Is convinced that the European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and the
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Is convinced that the European Union
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes that the Northern Dimension
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes that the Northern Dimension framework and the Council of the Baltic Sea States should provide the main fundamental basis for the external aspects of cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region; underlines, in this context, the importance of close cooperation with Norway, Belarus and
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes that the Northern Dimension framework should provide
source: PE-439.980
2010/03/30
REGI
109 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation a (new) - having regard to its resolution of 8 July 2008 on the environmental impact of the planned gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea to link up Russia and Germany (Petitions 0614/2007 and 0952/2006 (2007/2118(INI)),
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Welcomes the EU2020 Strategy, which is coherent with the goals set on the Baltic Sea Strategy and notes that the EU2020 can act as an efficient framework for the implementation and strengthening of the Baltic Sea Strategy;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Calls on the European Commission, the Member States and its own members to find answers to the questions of what nature macro-regional policies should take and how they should be programmed (separately or as part of cohesion policy)
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Calls on the European Commission, the Member States and its own members to find answers to the questions of what nature macro-regional policies should take and how they should be programmed (separately or as part of cohesion policy) and timed, who should implement them and how, and with what sources of funding they should be financed, particularly in the context of the EU2020 Strategy, the EU budget review and the future cohesion policy;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Calls on the European Commission, the Member States and its own members to find answers to the questions of what nature macro-regional policies should take and how they should be programmed in an equal manner (separately or as part of cohesion policy), who should implement them and how, and with what sources of funding they should be financed in order not to create unnecessary multiplication and fragmentation of community funding;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Calls on the European Commission, the Member States and its own members to find answers to the questions of what nature macro-regional policies should take and how they should be programmed (separately or as part of cohesion policy), who should implement them and how, and with what sources of funding they should be financed; particular attention should be paid to the aspect of transnational cooperation;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Emphasises that the European added value of macro-regions lies in greater cooperation between states and regions, which is why the European Territorial Cooperation Programmes for cross- border, transnational and inter-regional cooperation is a key element in implementing the macro-regions’ aims; draws attention to the fact that the focus is on cooperation between states and regions and the European Territorial Cooperation Programmes are therefore particularly well suited to achieving the common goals of a greater area; does not, however, rule out the possibility of projects supported by other European development schemes being directed towards the goals of macro-regional development strategies at the discretion of the Member States;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Proposes that the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region should be regarded as a European Union strategy, based upon several EU policies, which should have a defined time frame and goals; given its horizontal nature, the strategy could be treated as macro-regional and its coordination linked to regional policy;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Believes that the development of large-scale strategies, such as macro- regional strategies, should contribute to enhancing the role of the local and regional level in the implementation of EU policy more generally;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 b (new) 21b. Suggests continuing to develop new strategies in other geographical areas such as the Danube Basin, the Atlantic Arc, the Alps and the Mediterranean, ensuring that these have adequate support from the States involved and the European institutions;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Believes that the implementation of the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region can only prove to be successful if there is coherent coordination on European and macro regional level;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Underlines the importance of allocating adequate funds to the EU budget line foreseen for implementation of the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region to ensure cooperation and coherence on European level and macro regional level;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 c (new) 3c. Notes that the finances of the Strategy of the Baltic Sea Region cannot be the financing instrument for any external cooperation with third states in the Baltic Sea Region;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises the need for an environmental impact assessment of the Northern Gas Pipeline
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises the need for an environmental impact assessment of
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises the need for an environmental impact assessment of the Northern Gas Pipeline and other similar projects
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises the need for an environmental impact assessment of the Northern Gas Pipeline and other similar projects
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises the need for an objective and reliable environmental impact assessment of the North
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. having regard to the fact that the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region is a pilot for future macro-regional strategies,
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises the need for an environmental impact assessment of the Northern Gas Pipeline and other similar projects as well as the need to ensure that the construction of the pipeline does not affect shipping conditions adversely; in the interest of sustainable development and green growth it is important to achieve strong environmental protection in all macro-regions, as well as equal consideration for environmental protection, travel and other aspects;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls on the European Commission to implement the recommendations of the European Parliament contained in its resolution of 8 July 2008 on the environmental impact of the planned gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea to link up Russia and Germany, including, in particular, to carry out an independent environmental impact assessment of the Northern Gas Pipeline and its compliance with EU and international law;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Emphasises the need for the establishment of a Baltic Sea Environmental Monitoring Centre, an alert system for accidents and serious cross-border pollution, and a joint action force for such situations;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Draws attention to the strategic significance of the Baltic Sea Region for the development of joint projects on energy efficiency and energy infrastructure, as well as renewable energy projects such as
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Draws attention to the strategic significance of the Baltic Sea Region for the development of renewable energy projects such as wind farms (onshore or offshore) or biogas plants for biofuels available in the region;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Draws attention to the strategic significance of the Baltic Sea
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Draws attention to the strategic significance of the Baltic Sea Region for the development of renewable energy projects such as wind farms, geothermal energy or biofuels available in the region;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Draws attention to the positive cooperation already achieved in the energy and climate sector between the Council of the Baltic Sea States and the Nordic Council in the context of the Northern Dimension;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Emphasises that in view of intended expansion of nuclear energy in Baltic Sea region, EU countries have to follow the most strict safety and environmental standards. European Commission has to watch and monitor if the same approach and international conventions are followed in the neighbouring countries, especially in those which are planning to build nuclear power plants near external EU borders.
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6.
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. having regard to the fact that the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region is a pilot for future macro-regional strategies, such as the Danube Basin, the Mediterranean Sea, the Alps and the Atlantic Arc, and that the Strategy’s success
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Draws attention to the need to create an effective and as environmentally friendly as possible communication and transport network
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Draws attention to the need to create an effective and environmentally friendly transport and communication network (sea, land and inland), while using the shortest and most multimodal transport corridors;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Draws attention to the need to create an effective and environmentally friendly transport and communication network (sea,
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Draws attention to the need to create an effective, sustainable and environmentally friendly transport and communication network (sea, land and inland);
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Draws attention to the still significant
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Draws attention to the significant economic disproportion that exists in the Baltic Sea Region
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Draws attention to the significant
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Draws attention to the significant economic disproportion that exists in the Baltic Sea Region and in terms of innovation, and the necessity to increase the potential of highly developed areas and
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Draws attention to the
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Draws attention to the significant economic disproportion that exists in the Baltic Sea Region and in terms of innovation, and the necessity to increase the potential of highly developed areas and eliminate inequality in order to create a permanent area of common prosperity with a high level of competitiveness, which is crucial in the face of an aging population and new patterns in globalisation;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. having regard to the fact that the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region is a pilot for future macro-regional strategies, such as the Danube
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Draws attention to the fact that the economic growth in significant areas of the Baltic Sea Region is entirely dependent upon maintaining and developing coastal fishing, which provides particular environmental, economic and cultural benefits and gives the inhabitants of those areas the opportunity to secure an appropriate standard of living;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Emphasises that the efficient and consistent implementation of existing EU legal acts for strengthening the internal market, such as the Services Directive, is necessary to increase the attractiveness of the Baltic Sea Region as an economic area;
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for the renewal and deepening
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for the
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for the renewal and deepening of relations as part of the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region between the European Union and neighbouring countries not belonging to the Union whose territories are part of the functional spaces of a given macro-region or affect those spaces directly, particularly in the implementation of large-scale projects that could affect the state of the Baltic Sea environment;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for the renewal and deepening of relations as part of the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region between the European Union and neighbouring countries not belonging to the Union whose territories are part of the functional spaces of a given macro-region or affect those spaces directly, in particular Russia and Belarus;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for the renewal and deepening of relations as part of the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region between the European Union and neighbouring countries not belonging to the Union whose territories are part of the functional spaces of a given macro-region or affect those spaces directly; and also calls for a mechanism to strengthen security within the region and aid the fight against cross-border crime;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Draws attention to the need to seek greater cooperation particularly between Russia and Belarus and the Baltic States when constructing the energy network, and to take greater advantage of the energy dialogue between the EU and Russia for this purpose, which would at the same time open up opportunities for involving Russia in the Baltic Sea Strategy;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Notes that deepening of relations with third countries is possible on the basis of shared responsibilities for the environmental challenges and of equal commitments to transparency, reciprocity and international rules; expects all actors around the Baltic Sea to join the Espoo Convention; notes that external relations with third states in the Baltic Sea Region beyond the sectoral cooperation within the Strategy must be financed from instruments meant for external relations of the EU;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Believes that in order to achieve an effective protection of the environment and of biodiversity, agreements should be reached with the non-EU states that are part of the functional areas interested by the strategies, so that they can share the same values, rights and duties contained in the relevant European Union legislation;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. having regard to the fact that the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region is a pilot for future macro-regional strategies, such
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9.
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Calls on the Member States and regions to take advantage of the Structural Funds available for 2007-2013 in order to ensure maximum support for the Strategy,
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Calls on the Member States and regions to take advantage of the Structural Funds available for 2007-2013 in order to ensure maximum support for the Strategy, in particular to assist the creation of job opportunities and economic growth in areas most affected by the economic crisis, while understanding the difficulties associated with modifying the Operational Programmes in the current programming period;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Calls on the Member States and regions
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Calls on the European Commission to put forward proposals for regulations aimed at rebuilding the maritime economy of Baltic Sea countries, particularly in regard to shipbuilding and national shipping;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that all actions regarding sector policies with a territorial dimension are of key importance to the Strategy’s
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that all actions regarding sector policies with a territorial dimension are of key importance to the Strategy’s success and the achievement of the ambitious goals of further micro-regional strategies, including the common agricultural policy, fisheries policy and industrial policy, as well as combining available funds intended for jointly defined goals in a given area; in this context a policy review should be carried out with regard to these new challenges
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that all actions regarding sector policies with a territorial dimension are of key importance to the Strategy’s success and the achievement of the ambitious goals of further micro-regional strategies, including the common agricultural policy, fisheries policy and industrial policy, as well as combining available funds intended for jointly defined goals in a given area; in this context a policy review should be carried out with regard to these new challenges
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that all actions regarding sector policies with a territorial dimension are of key importance to the Strategy’s success and the achievement of the ambitious goals of further micro-regional strategies, including the common agricultural policy, fisheries policy and industrial policy, as well as combining available funds intended for jointly defined goals in a given area; in this context a policy review should be carried out with regard to these new challenges and
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that all actions regarding sector policies with a territorial dimension are of key importance to the Strategy’s success and the achievement of the ambitious goals of further micro-regional strategies, including the common agricultural policy, fisheries policy and industrial policy, as well as combining available funds intended for jointly defined goals in a given area; in this context a policy review should be carried out with regard to these new challenges and appropriate organisational structures put in place at EU level, and how they should relate with existing national and local structures;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) Da. because the Baltic Sea remains the most polluted sea in the European Union and large-scale energy infrastructure projects that are implemented in the Baltic Sea itself as well as in the territories around it (especially in third countries) do not help the situation,
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that all actions regarding sector policies with a territorial dimension are of key importance to the Strategy’s success and the achievement of the ambitious goals of further micro-regional strategies, including the common agricultural policy, fisheries policy
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that all actions regarding sector policies with a territorial dimension are of key importance to the Strategy’s success and the achievement of the ambitious goals of further micro-regional strategies, including the common agricultural policy, fisheries policy
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that all actions regarding sector policies with a territorial dimension are of key importance to the Strategy’s success and the achievement of the ambitious goals of further micro-regional
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Believes that the Strategy’s territorial dimension will lead to the concrete development of reflections on territorial cohesion, which the Treaty of Lisbon places on an equal footing with economic and social cohesion, and with this in mind calls on the Commission to get involved in active dialogue on the role and effect of EU macro-regional policies after 2013;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Believes that the Strategy’s territorial dimension will lead to the concrete development of
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Believes that the Strategy’s territorial dimension will lead to the concrete development of reflections on the territorial cohesion of states, which the Treaty of Lisbon places on an equal footing with economic and social cohesion;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12.
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Welcomes the strengthening of cooperation between countries and regions in terms of macro-regions and the development of further joint action strategies as complementary tool to the existing program structures in general and notes, that the macro-region strategies should not replace national inputs, but rather should complement them;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Welcomes the strengthening of cooperation between countries and regions in terms of macro-regions and the development of further joint action strategies
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Draws attention to the fact that the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region should be seen as a process in which the principle of action and cooperation is constantly developed, making it necessary to update the strategy in line with subsequent developments, and that the overriding goal is to find optimal mechanisms that can be transferred to future macro-regional strategies;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes, in particular, the fact that the Strategy is the result of broad consultation with interested parties in the Member States, including not only national, regional and local authorities but also the academic and business communities as well as NGOs, showing that the consultation process and the inclusion of partners from the very beginning of work on the Strategy is an important factor in its success
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Draws attention to the fact that the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region should be seen as a process in which the principle of action and cooperation is constantly developed, and that the overriding goal is to find optimal mechanisms that can be transferred to future macro-regional strategies; therefore calls for the collation and summarising of the results and good practices from the implementation of the Strategy which could form the basis for the good practice database planned by the Commission;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Draws attention to the fact that the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region should be seen as a process in which the principle of action and cooperation is constantly developed, and that the overriding goal is to find optimal mechanisms that can be transferred to future macro-regional strategies; underlines, in this respect, the importance of promoting successful initiatives with a view to using them to inform future macro-regional strategies;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Considers that territorial cooperation developed as part of a strategy for macro- regions can lead to a significant strengthening of the integration process through the greater involvement of civil society in the decision-making process and
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Considers that territorial cooperation developed as part of a strategy for macro- regions can lead to a significant strengthening of the integration process through the greater involvement of civil society in the decision-making process and the implementation of concrete actions; in this context the implementation of social, cultural, educational and tourism elements are recommended for macro-regional strategies;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Considers that territorial cooperation developed as part of a strategy for macro- regions can lead to a significant strengthening of the integration process through the greater involvement of civil
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Considers that territorial cooperation developed as part of a strategy for macro- regions can lead to a significant strengthening of the integration process through the greater involvement of civil society in the decision-making process and the implementation of concrete actions; in this context the implementation of social, cultural and tourism elements are recommended for macro-regional strategies, and, in order to strengthen local civil society participation and subsidiarity, also considers it important to promote macro-regional strategies by setting up EGTCs;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Emphasises the importance of
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Emphasises the importance of promoting the development of culture, education and research as well as encouraging the Member States to enter into close cooperation in these areas;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Emphasises the importance of promoting the development of education
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Emphasises the importance of promoting the development of education and research as well as encouraging the Member States to enter into close cooperation in these areas; recommends the strengthening of the strategic approach and long-term planning in respect of macro-regions. In this respect it is important to define and discuss extensively the future image the macro- region wishes to promote and the strategic developments it wishes to implement in order to achieve this;
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes, in particular, the fact that the Strategy is the result of broad consultation with interested parties in the Member States, including not only national, regional and local authorities but also the academic and business communities as well as NGOs, showing that the consultation process and the inclusion of partners from the very beginning of work on the Strategy is an important factor in its success, and therefore recommends increasing the local community’s involvement by opening up wider and more powerful communication and consultation also through the local media (local TV, radio and printed and online newspapers);
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Guided by the principle of subsidiarity, under which the Union shall act if the objectives of the proposed action cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States, and seeing the enormous potential for cooperation at local and regional level, underlines the considerable importance of creating an effective, multilevel structure for cooperation, that capitalises these new cooperation opportunities in these functional areas while respecting established local and regional institutions;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Guided by the principle of subsidiarity, and seeing the enormous potential for cooperation at local and regional level, underlines the considerable importance of creating an effective, multilevel structure for cooperation through the promotion of sectoral partnerships, with regular meetings of competent policy makers, which will strengthen the responsibility shared between the various partner entities;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Guided by the principle of subsidiarity, and seeing the enormous potential for cooperation at local and regional level, underlines the considerable importance of creating an effective, multilevel structure for cooperation by protecting the organisational sovereignty of the Member States and regions;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Guided by the principle of subsidiarity, and seeing the enormous potential for cooperation at local and regional level, underlines the considerable importance of creating an effective, multilevel structure for cooperation as part of the existing structures;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Guided by the principle of subsidiarity, and seeing the enormous potential for cooperation at local and regional level, underlines the considerable importance of creating an effective, multilevel structure for cooperation; in this respect, calls for the cross-border cooperation mechanisms put in place at the local and regional level to be improved, developed and strengthened;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. In this context, calls on the European Commission to create a special web portal devoted to Baltic Sea cooperation, which would act as an information centre regarding the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and inter- governmental, non-governmental, regional and local initiatives, and which would also act as a forum for the exchange of experience regarding current and future projects undertaken by central and local governments, NGOs and other entities active in the Baltic Sea Region;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. Stresses the fact that the new "macroregional" framework of cooperation has a strong "top-down" approach with the Member States to have a decisive role in its development and creates a new level of governance· in the framework of this new model of cooperation it has to be assured that the natural handicaps of the peripheral regions are converted into assets and opportunities, and that the development of these regions is stimulated';
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17.
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Considers that the idea of macro- regions combines the considerable potential for optimising the response to the challenges and problems appearing in a given region with that of using the resources available; and by making use of the particular characteristics of each region, sector-wide solutions can be identified;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Considers that the idea of macro- regions combines the considerable potential for optimising the response to the challenges and problems appearing in a given region with that of
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Welcomes, in particular, the fact that the Strategy is the result of broad consultation
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18.
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Awaits with great interest the analysis of the first results and experiences in connection with the implementation of the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Awaits with great interest the analysis of the first results and experiences in connection with the implementation of the Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region, which will
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Awaits with great interest the analysis
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. For the benefit of future macro-regional strategies, draws attention to the need for the European Commission to
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. For the benefit of future macro-regional strategies, draws attention to the need for the European Commission to resolve the issue of its own appropriate human and financial resources via avoiding duplication of work, and rethinking the new priorities while accordingly shifting the resources to specialised needs and expertise requirements to be met;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. For the benefit of future macro-regional strategies, draws attention to the need for the European Commission to resolve the issue of its own appropriate human and financial resources, in order, inter alia, to anticipate these strategies in the regions concerned on the basis of the territorial realities;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. For the benefit of future macro-regional strategies, draws attention to the need for the European Commission to resolve the issue of its own appropriate human and financial resources; draws attention to the fact that the Commission can provide participating Member States with impetus for topics of European interest and support them in drawing up a strategy, negotiate new alliances to be forged during the implementation phase, perform an advisory function and be asked by the Member States to act as coordinator;
source: PE-440.046
2010/05/14
REGI
1 amendments...
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Draws attention to the need to create an effective and environmentally friendly transport and communication network (sea, land and inland), paying particular attention to links between the Baltic Sea region and other European regions through the Baltic-Adriatic Corridor and the Central European Transport Corridor;
source: PE-441.310
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
docs/0 |
|
docs/8 |
|
docs/9 |
|
docs/9/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0381/COM_COM(2011)0381_EN.pdfNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0381/COM_COM(2011)0381_EN.pdf |
events/0/date |
Old
2009-06-10T00:00:00New
2009-06-09T00:00:00 |
docs/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.338New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE439.338 |
docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE438.378&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TRAN-AD-438378_EN.html |
docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE440.046New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE440.046 |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE438.455&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/ENVI-AD-438455_EN.html |
docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE439.837&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/AFET-AD-439837_EN.html |
docs/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE441.310New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=PE441.310 |
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0202_EN.htmlNew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0202_EN.html |
events/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2009/0248/COM_COM(2009)0248_EN.pdfNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2009/0248/COM_COM(2009)0248_EN.pdf |
events/1/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
events/2/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
events/3 |
|
events/3 |
|
events/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20100705&type=CRENew
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EN&reference=20100705&type=CRE |
events/6 |
|
events/6 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 150
|
procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 52
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
docs/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-202&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0202_EN.html |
docs/7/body |
EC
|
docs/8/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0381/COM_COM(2011)0381_EN.pdfNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2011/0381/COM_COM(2011)0381_EN.pdf |
events/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A7-2010-202&language=ENNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-7-2010-0202_EN.html |
events/6/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P7-TA-2010-254New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-7-2010-0254_EN.html |
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/4 |
|
committees/4 |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 150 |
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
REGI/7/01786New
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 52
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
procedure/title |
Old
European Union strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and the role of macro-regions in the future cohesion policyNew
European Union strategy for the Baltic Sea region and the role of macro-regions in the future cohesion policy |
activities/0/commission/0/DG/title |
Old
Regional PolicyNew
Regional and Urban Policy |
activities/0/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/registre/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2009/0248/COM_COM(2009)0248_EN.pdfNew
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2009/0248/COM_COM(2009)0248_EN.pdf |
other/0/dg/title |
Old
Regional PolicyNew
Regional and Urban Policy |
procedure/geographical_area/0 |
Old
Baltic Sea AreaNew
Baltic Sea area |
procedure/subject/1 |
Old
4.70.02 Cohesion, Cohesion FundNew
4.70.02 Cohesion policy, Cohesion Fund |
activities |
|
committees |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure |
|