2016/2326(INI) | [ParlTrack]

Ivana MALETIĆ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Maria SPYRAKI

Motion for a resolution
Citation 1

– having regard to the Treaty on European union (TEU), in particular Article 3, and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), in particular Articles 4, 162, 174 to 178 and 349 thereof,

Amendment 10 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 22 a (new)

– having regard to the report of the European Court of Auditors Special, Report no. 19/2016: Implementing the EU budget through financial instruments – lessons to be learnt from the 2007-2013 programme period,

Amendment 100 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

Amendment 101 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic objectives and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as an unallocated reserve or a simplification of re-programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region; hopes that specific measures are taken to promote the application of cohesion policy to the needs of specific areas, such as islands and peripheral regions;

Amendment 102 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Underlines that it is crucial to find the right balance between the result orientation of the policy and the level of checks and controls as well as simplification of procedures; stresses that this should also include the audit process, which has to be based on trust, be preventive, predictable and proportional and respect the outcomes of the national control and audit processes;

Amendment 103 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Underlines that thematic concentration and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; calls on the Commission to strengthen the necessary correspondence between diagnoses of local needs and choices of intervention, in the wake of the positive experience of the smart specialisation strategy, and to propose ideas for greater flexibility, such as a simplification of reprogramming, in order to adapt investments of ESI funds to unforeseen events and the specific needs of each region;

Amendment 104 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Considers that arrangements should be offered, that are both flexible and strategically linked to a long-term regional development plan, to aim at accompanying regions in their transition process and pro-actively shaping their transformation also by drawing conclusions on the functioning of the EU Solidarity Fund and the Globalisation Adjustment Fund; Underlines that synergies with the Just Transition Fund need to be established;

Amendment 105 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Stresses the need to create a new programming system for cohesion policy that would take a different approach towards countries and regions depending on their specific development needs and the level of development of community and business infrastructure that has been achieved, and depending on their different assumptions, economic structure and capacity to achieve the objectives of cohesion policy;

Amendment 106 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Supports the performance reserve as it encourages high level output results; Notes that the time between the performance and the opening of the reserve is too long, thereby reducing the effectiveness of the reserve; urges the Commission therefore to allow Member States to operationalize the use of the performance reserve as soon as the evaluation has been finalised;

Amendment 107 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Considers that the use for irregular migrants of ESI cohesion policy funding specifically aimed at reducing disparities between the regions of the Member States would seriously undermine the effectiveness of those funds and does not correspond to the objectives of cohesion policy;

Amendment 108 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Believes that Cohesion Policy should remain stable and predictable in order to avoid a negative impact on the strategic orientation and on the stability of multiannual operational programmes;

Amendment 109 #

Ivana MALETIĆ, Maria SPYRAKI, Andrey NOVAKOV, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Points out that, even in the post- 2020 period, cohesion policy must continue to play a key role in delivering the EU's objectives:

Amendment 11 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 22 b (new)

– having regard to the report of the European Court of Auditors Opinion No 1/2017 concerning the proposal for a revision of the 'Financial Regulation',--

Amendment 110 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Underlines that the partnership principle, including the Code of Conduct, needs to be strengthened by introducing clear minimum requirements for partnership involvement, which would also apply in the preparation phase of the programmes, and by providing all involved partners with technical assistance for capacity building and training to allow meaningful engagement in Monitoring Committees where all partners shall have a voting right;

Amendment 111 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

~~8. Recognises the value of ex ante conditionalities, which enable the ESIF to support the Europe post-2020 objectives effectively without prejudice to the cohesion objectives stipulated in the Treaty;~~deleted

Amendment 112 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Recognises the value of ex ante conditionalities, which enable the ESIF to support the Europe post-2020 objectives effectively without prejudice to the cohesion objectives stipulated in the Treat~~Acknowledges that, despite improving programme performance, the introduction of several new requirements, such as thematic concentration, ex ante conditionalities and financial management, has contributed to delays in cohesion policy implementation in the 2014-2020 period and thereby increased the risk of large sums being decommitted by the end of that period; calls on the Commission to propose practical ways of addressing these difficulties with a view to a post-2020 cohesion policy;

Amendment 113 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Recognises the value of ex ante conditionalities, in particular the one on Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3), which enable the ESIF to support the Europe post-2020 objectives effectively without prejudice to the cohesion objectives stipulated in the Treaty;

Amendment 114 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Recognises the value of ex ante conditionalities, which enable the ESIF to support the Europe post-2020 objectives effectively without prejudice to the cohesion objectives stipulated in the Treaty; in the light of experience with the current programming period, calls for a more flexible and dynamic application of ex ante conditionality, for example by extending it to cover the entire programming cycle, and connecting it to incentive mechanisms in place of the existing sanctions in the event of unsatisfactory results;

Amendment 115 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Recognises the value of ex ante conditionalities, which enable the ESIF to support the Europe post-2020 objectives effectively without prejudice to the cohesion objectives stipulated in the Treaty; stresses the need to develop simplified procedures for the adjustment of operational programmes to increase the flexibility and adaptability of cohesion policy instruments;

Amendment 116 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Underlines that Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3) are supporting the strategic programming of the ESI Funds and have led to an increased performance orientation on the ground; pleads, therefore, to maintain this ex ante conditionality in the next policy framework;

Amendment 117 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Notes that RIS3 strengthens the regional innovation ecosystems; Is of the opinion therefore that smart specialisation should be a leading mechanism for post 2020 cohesion policy;

Amendment 118 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Opposes macro-economic conditionalities and highlights that the link between cohesion policy and economic governance processes should be reciprocal and that a greater recognition of the territorial dimension would be beneficial for the European Semester;deleted

Amendment 119 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Oppos~~Welcomes macro-economic conditionalities a~~nd highlights that the link between cohesion policy and economic governance~~s it improves the effectiveness of cohesion policy and, at the same time, creates process~~es should be reciprocal and that a greater recognition of~~ ure on Member States to comply withe t~~erritorial dimension would be beneficial for the European Semester~~he EU economic governance rules;

Amendment 12 #

Ivana MALETIĆ, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Maria SPYRAKI

Motion for a resolution
Citation 22 c (new)

– having regards to the report of the European Commission on the European Structural and Investment Funds and European Fund for Strategic Investments complementarities - ensuring coordination, synergies and complementarity,

Amendment 120 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Opposes macro-economic conditionalities and highlights that the~~Highlights that there must be a balanced link between cohesion policy and economic governance processes ~~should be reciprocal~~ and that a greater recognition of the territorial dimension would be beneficial for the European Semester;

Amendment 121 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Opposes macro-economic conditionalities and highlight~~Considers that the link between cohesion policy and economic governance processes ~~should be reciprocal and that a greater recognition of the territorial dimension would be beneficial f~~, as well as European Semester process, should be maintained for the purpose of creating the favourable investments environment for maximizing the impact of ESI Funds; considers the prolongation of the SRSP post 2020 to support the ~~European Semester~~Country Specific Recommendations' and structural reforms;

Amendment 122 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Opposes macro-economic conditionalities and h~~Highlights that the link between cohesion policy and economic governance processes should be reciprocal and that a greater recognition of the territorial dimension would be beneficial for the European Semester;

Amendment 123 #

Tomasz Piotr PORĘBA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

Amendment 124 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. OStrongly opposes macro-economic conditionalities and highlights that the link between cohesion policy and economic governance processes should ~~be reciprocal and that a greater recognition of the territorial dimension would be beneficial for the European Semester;~~ not be proposed again in the post-2020 framework; considers, in this regard, that the link-and the sanctions foreseen in the current article 23 of the Common Provision Regulation- are not only inappropriate but also very counter- productive as sanctions linked to deficits are likely to worsen the fiscal situation in the concerned Member States, and as a suspension of payments and/or commitments of ERDF or ESF would not only disrupt financial planning at the programme level but could also lead to projects being stopped on the ground; asks the Commission, moreover, to take into duly consideration the findings of the Sixth Cohesion Report, which states that, despite regional and local authorities being responsible for around 30% of total General Government expenditure and about 60% of General Government investment, the increase in public debt, as in the deficit, principally stems from central government activities;

Amendment 125 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. OStrongly opposes macro-economic conditionalities and highlights that the link between cohesion policy and economic governance processes should be reciprocal and that a greater recognition of the territorial dimension would be beneficial for the European Semester;

Amendment 126 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Opposes macro-economic conditionalities, which punish regions and final beneficiaries for erroneous steps taken at the level of the central government, and highlights that the link between cohesion policy and economic governance processes should be reciprocal and that a greater recognition of the territorial dimension would be beneficial for the European Semester;

Amendment 127 #

Younous OMARJEE, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Josu JUARISTI ABAUNZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Opposes macro-economic conditionalities and highlights that the link between cohesion policy and economic governance processes should be rec~~iprocal and that a greater recognition of the territorial dimension would be beneficial for the European Semester~~onsidered and based on comprehensive analysis; Underlines that the suspension of ESI Funds triggered by non- compliance with economic governance requirements is a double-punishment for EU regions, counteracts economic and social recovery efforts and should therefore be abolished;

Amendment 128 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Opposes macro-economic conditionalities and ~~highlights that the link between~~stresses that, at present, cohesion policy and economic governance ~~processes should be reciprocal and that a greater recognition of the territorial dimension would be beneficial for the European Semester~~do not share the same objectives; calls for economic governance objectives to be brought into line with the cohesion policy objectives of economic, social and territorial cohesion, sustainable growth, employment and environmental protection;

Amendment 129 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Believes, given that cohesion policy funding is intended to boost investment, growth and employment throughout the EU, that national contributions to the cofunding of projects under that policy in the post-2020 period should not be taken into account in deficit calculations under the Stability and Growth Pact rules;

Amendment 13 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas EU cohesion policy stems from the TEU and the TFEU and expresses the EU’s solidarity as one of the fundamental principles of the Union, by reducing regional disparities and promoting economic, social and territorial cohesion among all regions across the EU;

Amendment 130 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls on the Commission to review the investment clause to enable regional and national investments co-financed through ESI Funds to be excluded from the calculation of national deficits in the framework of the European Semester;

Amendment 131 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Points out that increasing the administrative and institutional capacities for programming, implementation and evaluation of operational programmes in the Member States and regions is crucial for timely and successful cohesion policy performance;

Amendment 132 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Points out that increasing the administrative capacities for programming, implementation and evaluation of operational programmes, as well as for better-quality professional training in the Member States and regions is crucial for timely and successful cohesion policy performance;

Amendment 133 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Points out that increasing the administrative capacities for programming, implementation and evaluation of operational programmes in the Member States and regions is crucial for timely and successful cohesion policy performance; calls for the establishment of a reserve for any unforeseen actions during the financing period;

Amendment 134 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Points out that increasing the administrative capacities for programming, implementation and evaluation of operational programmes in the Member States and regions is crucial for timely and successful cohesion policy performance and to this end promotes the centralisation of services relating to the evaluation of interventions and the strengthening of national agencies responsible for supporting and accelerating investments;

Amendment 135 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Points out that increasing the administrative capacities for programming, implementation and evaluation of operational programmes in the Member States and regions is crucial for timely and successful cohesion policy performance; stresses the importance in that context of the initiative Taiex Regio Peer 2 Peer which improves administrative capacity and better results for EU investments, by exchange of knowledge, good practices and practical solutions between public official involved in the management of ERDF and the Cohesion Fund;

Amendment 136 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Andrea COZZOLINO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Encourages managing authorities in the Member States, with a view to reducing the administrative burden and accelerating the implementation of the structural funds, to make wider use of the possibilities of EU legislation, which permits the granting of so-called specific types of expenditure such as standard scales of unit costs, flat-rate amounts and flat-rate financing;

Amendment 137 #

10a. Highlights the fact that cohesion policy can reinforce the administrative capacity of the owners of programmes cofunded by ESI funds and bring about convergence towards higher standards;

Amendment 138 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10b. Calls for regional / national co- funding to be separated from the calculation of the Stability and Growth Pact so that they respect the same rules as those governing Structural Fund resources, since they have the same objective;

Amendment 139 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

Amendment 14 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas EU cohesion policy expresses the EU’s solidarity as one of the fundamental principles of the Union, by pursuing its Treaty based objective of reducing regional disparities and promoting economic, social and territorial cohesion among all regions across the EU;

Amendment 140 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Highlights the need to simplify the cohesion policy’'s management system at all governance levels, facilitating the programming, management and evaluation of operational programmes, in order to make it more accessible and effective; supports the conclusions and recommendations hitherto adopted by the ‘'High Level Group monitoring simplification for beneficiaries of ESI Funds’';

Amendment 141 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Highlights the need to simplify the cohesion policy’s management system at all governance levels in order to reduce the administrative burdens and make it more accessible, flexible and effective; supports the conclusions and recommendations hitherto adopted by the ‘High Level Group monitoring simplification for beneficiaries of ESI Funds’;

Amendment 142 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Highlights the need to simplify the cohesion policy’s management system at all governance levels in order to make it more accessible and effective; in this context, emphasizes the importance of combatting the so-called phenomenon of gold-plating in the Member States, and supports the conclusions and recommendations hitherto adopted by the ‘High Level Group monitoring simplification for beneficiaries of ESI Funds’;

Amendment 143 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Highlights the need to simplify the cohesion policy’s management system at all governance levels in order to make it more accessible and effective; believes that there is a need for greater legal certainty and clarity and the that the prevention of goldplating, when implementing the ESI Funds, is essential; supports the conclusions and recommendations hitherto adopted by the ‘High Level Group monitoring simplification for beneficiaries of ESI Funds’;

Amendment 144 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Highlights the need to simplify the cohesion policy’s management system at all governance levels in order to make it more accessible and effective; asks the Commission to offer more possibilities for e-cohesion and to introduce a digital platform for information for applicants and beneficiaries; supports the conclusions and recommendations hitherto adopted by the ‘High Level Group monitoring simplification for beneficiaries of ESI Funds’;

Amendment 145 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

Amendment 146 #

Tomasz Piotr PORĘBA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Highlights the need to simplify the cohesion policy’s management system at all governance levels in order to make it more accessible and effective; supports the conclusions and recommendations hitherto adopted by the ‘High Level Group monitoring simplification for beneficiaries of ESI Funds’; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

Amendment 147 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Highlights the need to simplify the cohesion policy’s management system at all governance levels in order to make it more accessible and effective; supports the conclusions and recommendations hitherto adopted by the ‘High Level Group monitoring simplification for beneficiaries of ESI Funds’; calls for measures to encourage a reduction in individual measures and the concentration of resources in sectoral structural programmes to be implemented in accordance with priorities established by a process of concentration;

Amendment 148 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Calls on the Commission to prepare a standard procedure for drafting implementing documents, establishing competent bodies and implementing territorial cooperation programmes, particularly in the area of cross-border cooperation, given the large number of these programmes and the possibilities for achieving swifter and more efficient implementation and for preventing delays arising from the slow-moving and often heavily bureaucratic procedures between countries participating in the programmes;

Amendment 149 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Points out that Cohesion Policy management and implementation has to be based on the principles of predictability, proportionality and subsidiarity; emphasises in this respect the need for improving trust among all stakeholders involved, in particular the Commission and the Member States;

Amendment 15 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas EU cohesion policy expresses the EU’s solidarity as one of the fundamental principles of the Union, by reducing regional disparities and promoting economic, social and territorial cohesion among all regions across the EU and increasing regional competitiveness;

Amendment 150 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Calls on Member States to simplify and reduce the number of national rules and guidelines and to assure that the information on EU funding is clear, concise and do not constitute unnecessary burden for the beneficiaries; calls furthermore to avoid gold-plating in the future;

Amendment 151 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Stresses that the obligation to publish data on the granting of non- repayable funding from the ESI Funds is a means to increase transparency, public scrutiny and public awareness;

Amendment 152 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Asks the Commission to reflect on solutions based on proportionality and differentiation on the basis of objective criteria and positive incentives for the programmes, especially with regard to the multiple layers of audit and the number of controls~~, to a greater harmonisation between cohesion policy and competition policy, in particular state aid rules, as well as with regard to the possibility of a single set of rules for all ESI Funds~~;

Amendment 153 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. AStresses that the use of one-size- fits-all approach to cohesion policy intervention, irrespective of the scale of programmes, administrative capacity and the results achieved in individual regions, is one of the main causes of the current complexity; asks the Commission to reflect on solutions based on proportionality and differentiation for the implementation of programmes coming under the ESI Funds, especially with regard to the multiple layers of audit and the ~~number of controls, to a greater harm~~controls; calls also on the Commission to ensure consis~~ation~~tency between cohesion policy and competition policy, in particular state aid rules, a~~s well as with regard~~ nd to look into the possibility of a single set of rules for all ESI Funds;

Amendment 154 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Asks the Commission to reflect on solutions based on proportionality ~~and differentiation~~, especially with regard to the multiple layers of audit and the number of controls, to a greater harmonisation between cohesion policy and competition policy, in particular state aid rules, as well as with regard to the possibility of a single set of rules for all ESI Funds while allowing for specific rules necessary to take account of the specificities of each fund;

Amendment 155 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Asks the Commission to reflect on solutions based on proportionality and differentiation, especially with regard to the multiple layers of audit, which should be restricted to combating fraud and corruption, and the number of controls, to a greater harmonisation between cohesion policy and competition policy, in particular state aid rules, as well as with regard to the possibility of a single set of rules for all ESI Funds;

Amendment 156 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Asks the Commission to reflect on solutions based on proportionality and differentiation, especially with regard to the multiple layers of audit and the number of controls in order to find the right balance between the result orientation of the policy and the level of checks and controls or simplification of procedures, to a greater harmonisation between cohesion policy and competition policy, in particular state aid rules, as well as with regard to the possibility of a single set of rules for all ESI Funds;

Amendment 157 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Asks the Commission to reflect on solutions based on proportionality and risk based differentiation, especially with regard to the multiple layers of audit and the number of controls, to a greater harmonisation between cohesion policy and competition policy, in particular state aid rules, as well as with regard to the possibility of a single set of rules for all ESI Funds;

Amendment 158 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

Amendment 159 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Asks the Commission to reflect on solutions based on proportionality and differentiation, especially with regard to the multiple layers of audit and the number of controls, to a greater harmonisation between cohesion policy and competition policy, in particular state aid rules, as well as with regard to the possibility of a single set of rules for all ESI Funds; calls on the Member States to bring national audit procedures into line with those at European level without delay;

Amendment 16 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas after 2008 the functioning of the EU as a "convergence machine" has stalled and even gone into reverse, causing a serious increase in existing divergences between regions and Member States as well as the emergence of deepening social and economic inequalities throughout the Union hampering economic recovery and further damaging social cohesion;

Amendment 160 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Asks the Commission to reflect on solutions based on proportionality and differentiation, especially with regard to the multiple layers of audit and the number of controls, to a greater harmonisation between cohesion policy and competition policy, in particular state aid rules, as well as with regard to the possibility of a single set of rules for all ESI Funds, also with the assistance of specific information systems that can enable dialogue between all national government departments and EU departments; calls on the Commission to strengthen its support for regions with low absorption rates;

Amendment 161 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Calls on the Commission, with a view to real simplification, and in agreement with the managing authorities of national and regional programmes, to draw up a feasible plan to extend the simplified cost regime to the ERDF, also in keeping with the provisions of the proposal for a regulation to amend the financial rules applicable to the budget - the so-called Omnibus regulation;

Amendment 162 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Calls for reinforcing sub- delegation of competences to lower levels of governance as well as their role in planning and implementation of urban development under the ERDF by going well beyond the current arrangements, in order to tap the full potential of local and regional expertise;

Amendment 163 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12b. Believes that local development approaches need to be strengthened and instruments such as ITI and CLLD adapted where necessary; Calls on the Commission to make the use of CLLD obligatory for ERDF;

Amendment 164 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 b (new)

12b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that state aid rules are fully harmonised with Union policies, including the economic and financial instruments relating thereto;

Amendment 165 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 c (new)

12c. Further recognises the timeliness of evolving the partnerships principle towards participation of citizens in spending, in particular on local level, as part of increasing the visibility of the EU and ownership on investment decisions; Calls on the Commission to propose pilot schemes for participatory budgeting, drawing on best practice;

Amendment 166 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy; ~~note~~supports, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments; points out that the replacement of grants by loans, equity or guarantees must be carried out with caution where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass;

Amendment 167 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the ~~basis of the~~main tool for financing of cohesion policy as they are policy oriented; notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments; points out that ~~the replacement of grants by loans, equity or guarantees must be carried out with caution where~~cohesion policy grants should not be replaced by loans, equity or guarantees but should be complemented by such financial instruments where the latter demonstrate an added value and could have a leverage effect, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass;

Amendment 168 #

Mercedes BRESSO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy; ~~notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments~~stresses that the shift, even if partial, from grants to financial instruments may under no circumstances call into question the policy's main financing mechanism; points out that the replacement of grants by loans, equity or guarantees must be ~~carried out with cau~~taken into consideration where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass;

Amendment 169 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy; notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments; points out that ~~the replacement of grants by loans, equity or guarantees must~~loans, equity or guarantees can play a complementary role, but their use shall be carried out with caution and where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance of the Commission, European Investment Bank and Member States to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass; or by providing the incentives for the beneficiaries;

Amendment 17 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas since the financial crisis of 2008 regional disparities have increased more than differences between Member States, and public services such as education and health continue to be the most vulnerable sectors, cohesion in its economic, social and territorial dimension remains an urgently necessary policy;

Amendment 170 #

Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants ~~should~~, which are an effective means of providing public support in a wide range of areas, in particular for small beneficiaries, must remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy; notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments; points out that ~~the replacement of grants by~~ loans, equity orand guarantees ~~must be carried out with caution where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experienc~~should be used solely as a means of attracting additional financial support for cohesion efforts and only in sectors in which they have been shown to be more appropriate than grants as a means of achieving cohesion policy objectives; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass;

Amendment 171 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy~~; notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments; points out that the replacement of grants by loans, equity or guarantees must be carried out with cautio~~, in particular for smaller beneficiaries; stresses that the shift, even if partial, from grants to financial instruments should under no circumstances call into question the main funding mechanism of the Structural Funds; points out that the replacement of grants by loans, equity or guarantees should not be taken into consideration, except in those cases and sectors in wh~~ere~~ich such financial instruments ~~demonstrate an added value~~have already demonstrated that they produce added value compared to grants, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass;

Amendment 172 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy; notes~~, however, the gradual shift from grants to~~ the added value of their combination with other Community programmes, as well as EFSI and financial instruments; points out that the ~~replacement~~combination of grants bywith loans, equity or guarantees must be carried out ~~with caution where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences~~based on an appropriate ex-ante assessment; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass;

Amendment 173 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy; notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments and stresses that the use of these latter should not be an end in itself; points out that the replacement of grants by loans~~, equity~~ or guarantees must be carried out with caution and only where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass;

Amendment 174 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy~~; notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to~~ and the tailor-made financial instruments should have complementary role; notes, however, the increasing use of financial instruments; points out that the replacement of grants by loans, equity or guarantees must be carried out with caution where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass;

Amendment 175 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy~~; notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to~~, especially in less developed regions; notes, however, the importance of financial instruments; points out that the replacement of grants by loans, equity or guarantees must be carried out with caution, and only wheren such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass;

Amendment 176 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy; notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments; points out that ~~the replacement of grants by~~an increase of loans, equity or guarantees must be carried out with caution and only where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass;

Amendment 177 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy; notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments; points out that ~~the replac~~complement ofing grants by loans, equity or guarantees must be carried out with caution where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass;

Amendment 178 #

Ivana MALETIĆ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Maria SPYRAKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy; notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments; points out that the replacement of grants by loans, equity or guarantees must be carried out with caution where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass; Stresses that the success of financial instruments depends on a number of factors and that it is not possible to draw general, universal conclusions about their efficiency on the basis of one criterion, such as level of development; takes the view that all regions should be able to decide on the implementation of financial instruments and intervention sectors on a voluntary basis and according to local needs; opposes binding quantified targets for the use of financial instruments;

Amendment 179 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy; notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments; points out that the replacement of grants by loans, equity or guarantees must be carried out with caution where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass; calls on the Commission to ensure exchange of knowledge and experiences in working with financial instruments and to mandatorily carry out ex-ante evaluations including impact analyses, advantages and deficiencies of similar instruments in development of new financial instruments;

Amendment 18 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas cohesion policy is a powerful tool for European integration and delivers tangible results on the ground for all citizens, in particular felt in border areas where it strives for reducing the negative effects of frontiers;

Amendment 180 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Highlights that many regions suggest to create financial instruments adapted to specific regional needs; stresses, moreover, that grants remain necessary to support firms particularly in the context of less developed or less populated regions for risky projects that may not meet the necessary conditions for support under FIs schemes and for projects which do not guarantee immediate returns (e.g. projects in the fields of research, social projects, some infrastructure investments, active labour market policy);

Amendment 181 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Stresses that the use of financial instruments under the ESI Funds operational programmes could increase the already existing risk of low disbursement rates, excessive capital endowments, an inability to attract satisfactory levels of private capital, a low leverage effect and problematic revolving, as highlighted by the Court of Auditors Special Report No 19/2016;

Amendment 182 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Is highly concerned about the trend of turning ESI Funds into a risk- sharing facility which does not comply with its investment character targeting the real economy and with its accountability to the public interest;

Amendment 183 #

14. Calls on the Commission to ensure better synergies between the ESI Funds and other Union funds and programmes and to facilitate multi-fund options; w~~arns that the EFSI should not undermine the strategic coherence an~~elcomes synergies such as the Seal of Excellence and calls for similar schemes foreseeing a quality certification, based lon~~g-term perspective of cohesion policy programming and insists on the additionality of its resources~~ a thorough evaluation of the projects, to be implemented and enhanced in the post-2020 framework;

Amendment 184 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Calls on the Commission to ensure better synergies between the ESI Funds and other Union funds and programmes and to facilitate the implementation of multi-fund operations; ~~warn~~considers that the ~~EFSI should not undermine the strategic coherence and long-term perspective of cohesion policy programming and insists on the additionality of its resources~~harmonization of rules applicable to multi-fund operations and a clear presentation of different funding possibilities at the European level is crucial to ensure the best possible use of scarce financial resources; encourages the Commission to develop a toolbox for beneficiaries in this context;

Amendment 185 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 186 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Calls on the Commission to ensure better synergies between the ESI Funds and other Union funds and programmes, including EFSI, and to facilitate multi- fund options; ~~warns~~stresses that the combination of resources from ESI Funds with EFSI or other EIB financial instruments can make the funding structure more attractive to beneficiaries and private sector investors due to improved risk sharing; warns, however, that the EFSI should not undermine the strategic coherence and long-term perspective of cohesion policy programming and insists on the additionality of its resources;

Amendment 187 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Calls on the Commission to ensure better synergies and communication between the ESI Funds and other Union funds and programmes and to facilitate multi-fund options; warns that the EFSI should not undermine the strategic coherence and long-term perspective of cohesion policy programming and insists on the additionality of its resources;

Amendment 188 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 189 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 19 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas cohesion policy combines the specific needs of a given territory with European priorities taking thereby into account the diversity of EU regions;

Amendment 190 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 191 #

Younous OMARJEE, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Josu JUARISTI ABAUNZ

14. Calls on the Commission to ensure better synergies between the ESI Funds and other Union funds and programmes and to facilitate multi-fund options; warns that the EFSI should not undermine the strategic coherence and long-term perspective of cohesion policy programming and insists on the additionality of its resources; addresses that the combination of funding instruments should be adequately monitored, including in terms of results and objectives achieved, properly reported, to ensure transparency and accountability; expresses its attitude that best approach to reach the synergy is phasing of the projects and financing different phases from different instruments instead of mixing the instruments;

Amendment 192 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

Amendment 193 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Stresses that because the coordination of macro-regional strategies with existing development tools is still insufficient in terms of policy priorities, budgetary guidance, organisation and administration, these strategies are as yet unable to demonstrate their great potential; calls on the Commission to propose tools that can help bring about a substantial integration of operational programmes with the action plans set out in the macro-regional strategies;

Amendment 194 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Considers the existing investment gap nowadays and stresses the necessity to encourage the use of EFSI and innovative financial instruments because they could bring to leverage in additional resources; underlines the need to facilitate further their use in the context of complementarity with the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) and other financial programmes and initiatives;

Amendment 195 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Recognises that access to finance should be improved by simple measures to improve awareness and provide administrative and technical assistance; calls on the Commission to propose One- Stop Shops to all EU Member States and to provide holistic advice to citizens and communities wishing to participate in EU funding programmes and contributing to sustainable development;

Amendment 196 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Notes that state aid rules apply to the ESI Funds but not to EFSI or Horizon 2020, which causes problems with regard to increasing the level of synergy among the funds, programmes and instruments; urges, therefore, the Commission to come forward with common rules for state aid;

Amendment 197 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Points out that the proposals on the extension of the EFSI should not aim at replacing or reducing the budget of the European Structural and Investment Funds;

Amendment 198 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Recalls the Stairway to Excellence (S2E) EU budget pilot project, which continues to support regions of all Member States in developing and exploiting the synergies between the ESI Funds, Horizon 2020 and other EU funding programmes;

Amendment 199 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 c (new)

14c. Notes that there are both divergences as well as similarities in aims and focus between Horizon 2020 and the ESI Funds; Notes that the introduction in the Common Provisions Regulation of thematic objective 1 on Strengthening research, technical development and innovation strongly increased the uptake of the research results in the real economy and shows the partial similarities between the aims and focus; takes the view, therefore, that further efforts must be made to maximise synergies between Horizon 2020 and ESI Funds in order to further strengthen smart specialisation and innovation;

Amendment 2 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)

– having regard to all the communications issued on the outermost regions by the Commission,

Amendment 20 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas cohesion policy remains the main EU-wide investment policy for smart, sustainable ~~job creation~~and inclusive growth after 2020, especially against the backdrop of a sharp decline in public and private investments in many Member States and the implications of globaliszation, demographic change, climate change, energy supply and transition, social exclusion and poverty and migration;

Amendment 200 #

Tomasz Piotr PORĘBA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of alternative indicators to the GDP indicator, which remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such alternative indicators may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators based on social and employment aspects; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;deleted

Amendment 201 #

Stanislav POLČÁK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. ~~Invi~~Notes th~~e Commission to reflect on the development of alternative indicators to the~~at GDP indicator~~, which~~ remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; ~~such alternative indicators may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators based on social and employment aspects;~~ stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

Amendment 202 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. ~~Invi~~Notes th~~e Commission to reflect on the development of alternative indicators to the GDP indicator, which remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such alternative indicators~~at GDP remains the only reliable and legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; believes, however, that alternative indicators should be evaluated, which may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators based on social and employment aspects, to be used in the future whenever their reliability will be ensured; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

Amendment 203 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. ~~Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of alternative indicators~~Considers per capita GDP for each region, measured in purchasing power parities, and average EU27 GDP to be the most important regional classification and funding allocation instruments; takes the view that the Commission may consider it appropriate to use other statistical indicators for the allocation of funding, in addition to the GDP indicator, which remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such alternative indicators may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators based on social and employment aspects; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

Amendment 204 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to ~~reflect on the development~~consider the use of alternative indicators to the GDP indicator, which remains the ~~legitimate method~~principal instrument for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such alternative indicators may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators based on social and employment aspects; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

Amendment 205 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of alternative indicators-such as the Social Progress Index- to the GDP indicator, which ~~remains~~should remain one of the legitimate methods for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such alternative indicators may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators based on social and employment aspects; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

Amendment 206 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of alternative indicators to the GDP indicator~~, which remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly~~; such alternative indicators may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators based on social and employment aspects; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

Amendment 207 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of alternative indicators to complement the GDP indicator, which ~~remains the legitimate method~~alone does not have the capacity to provide a comprehensive picture of regional development as it fails to take account of social and environmental factors relevant for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such alternative indicators may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators based on social and employment aspects; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

Amendment 208 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of alternative indicators to the GDP indicator, which remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such ~~alternative~~complementary indicators may ~~include~~be based on a demographic or geographical indicator or ~~dynamic~~social indicators ~~based on social and~~ such as unemployment ~~aspect~~rates; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

Amendment 209 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of ~~alternative indicators to~~indicators that complement the GDP indicator, which remains ~~the~~a legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such ~~alternative~~complementary indicators may include ~~a demographic~~territorial indicators or dynamic indicators based on social and employment aspects; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

Amendment 21 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas cohesion policy remains the main and most successful EU-wide investment policy ~~for~~supporting growth, development and sustainable job creation after 2020, especially against the backdrop of a sharp decline in public and private investments in many Member States and the implications of globalisation;

Amendment 210 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of a~~lternative~~dditional indicators next to the GDP indicator, which remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such a~~lternative~~dditional indicators may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators based on social and employment aspects; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

Amendment 211 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of alternative set of indicators to the GDP indicator, which remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such set of alternative indicators may include ~~a demographic indicator or~~ dynamic indicators based on demographic, social and employment aspects, such as Social Progress Index; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

Amendment 212 #

Younous OMARJEE, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Josu JUARISTI ABAUNZ

15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of alternative indicators to the GDP indicator, which remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; ~~such alternative indicators may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators bas~~believes that the Social Progress Index or a demographic indicator should be considered oin ~~social and employment aspects~~this context; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

Amendment 213 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Recalls that Article 349 TFEU provides for specific access to structural funds for the outermost regions and that, on that basis, all the outermost regions should be regarded as ‘least developed regions’; calls for the continuation of budget allocations to the outermost regions, of co-financing at a level no less than in the current period (85%), of compensation for excess costs, and of all derogations intended to offset their structural disadvantages;

Amendment 214 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Calls on the Commission to consider measures aimed at resolving the issue of national financing of cohesion policy projects in view of the problem faced by local and regional authorities in highly centralised Member States that do not have sufficient fiscal and financial capacities and that experience great difficulties in co-financing projects, and often even in drafting project documentation, due to the lack of available financial resources, which leads to lower utilisation of cohesion policy;

Amendment 215 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Points out that purely statistical effects, such as those which would arise from the United Kingdom leaving the EU, should not lead to any EU27 region losing its classification as a less -developed or transition region, as the socio-economic situation in these regions remains unchanged in reality. The European Commission should therefore include adequate "safety net" proposals in its regulations governing ESIF post 2020;

Amendment 216 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Call on the Commission to maintain the European Territorial Cooperation as one of the three equally important goals of cohesion policy; underlines, that its budget should match the great challenges that ETC has to meet, and its potential of providing the high level of European added value; calls for greater respect for Article 174 TFEU on territorial cohesion;

Amendment 217 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Calls on the Commission to present to the European Parliament and to the Council a thorough analysis of the problems which caused significant delay in programming and starting implementation of cohesion policy at the beginning of the 2014-2020 period and to propose measures for avoiding such problems and delay from arising in the post-2020 period;

Amendment 218 #

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Krzysztof HETMAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Believes that the respect for fundamental rights in the implementation of ESI Funds programmes requires more attention; Stresses that fundamental rights can only be ensured when appropriate principles are established which are necessarily underpinned by effective follow-up action including ex- ante conditionalities;

Amendment 219 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Encourages the Commission to consider the possibility of using NUTS III level as classification of regions in cohesion policy for some selected priorities;

Amendment 22 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas cohesion policy remains the main EU-wide investment policy for sustainable job creation and for creating smart, sustainable and inclusive growth after 2020, especially against the backdrop of a sharp decline in public and private investments in many Member States and the implications of globalisation;

Amendment 220 #

Younous OMARJEE, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS, Josu JUARISTI ABAUNZ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

~~16.~~ Stresses the importance of the ESF, ~~16.~~ the Youth Guarantee and the Youth Employment Initiative, especially in the fight against long-term and youth unemployment in the Union, which are at a historically high level, particularly in less developed regions and regions which have been hit hardest by the crisis; is of the firm opinion that the ESF share has to be increased; emphasises the key role played by SMEs in job creation – accounting for 80 % of jobs in the Union – in promoting innovative sectors such as the digital and low-carbon economies;

Amendment 221 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Stresses the importance of the ESF, the Youth Guarantee and the Youth Employment Initiative, especially in the fight against long-term and youth unemployment in the Union, which are at a historically high level, particularly in less developed regions, the outermost regions and regions which have been hit hardest by the crisis; emphasises the key role played by SMEs in job creation – accounting for 80 % of jobs in the Union – in promoting innovative sectors such as the digital and low-carbon economies;

Amendment 222 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Stresses the importance of the ESF, the Youth Guarantee and the Youth Employment Initiative, especially in the fight against long-term and youth unemployment in the Union, which are at a historically high level, particularly in less developed regions, but also in the outermost regions and regions which have been hit hardest by the crisis; emphasises the key role played by SMEs in job creation – accounting for 80 % of jobs in the Union – in promoting innovative sectors such as the digital and low-carbon economies;

Amendment 223 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Points to the need to maintain social inclusion as mandatory element of ESF spending complemented by ERDF investment in that field; Considers, in this context, that arrangements for integrated funding need to be improved without making them more complicated;

Amendment 224 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Notes, in addition, the positive impact in terms of the social and employment-related added value of investments in education, training and culture; hopes that cohesion policy will continue to invest appropriately in those sectors;

Amendment 225 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 b (new)

16b. Recalls the urgent need to tackle the situation of marginalised communities as well as refugees and migrants; underlines the important role of cohesion policy in supporting their economic, social and territorial inclusion;

Amendment 226 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 c (new)

16c. Believes the post-2020 cohesion policy should step-up efforts to care for the vulnerable, address growing inequalities and build solidarity not only between regions and Member States but also between citizens; calls on the Commission to propose targeted financing solutions within cohesion policy to help and encourage Member States to implement deep retrofits and other measures to eradicate energy poverty across the Union, also taking into account the arrangements offered by the Fund for European Aid for the Most Deprived to address energy poverty, as well as its limits;

Amendment 227 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Suggests an increased use of ESI Funds in order to tackle demographic change and address its regional and local consequences; notes the increasing importance of the Territorial Agenda and of successful rural-urban partnerships, as well as the exemplary role of smart cities as microcosms and catalysts for innovative solutions for regional and local challenges;

Amendment 228 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

~~17. Suggests an increased use of ESI 17. Funds in order to tackle demographic change and address its regional and local consequences; n~~Notes the increasing importance of the Territorial Agenda and of successful rural-urban partnerships, as well as the exemplary role of smart cities as microcosms and catalysts for innovative solutions for regional and local challenges;

Amendment 229 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Suggests a~~n increased~~ better use of ESI Funds ~~in order to tackle~~to create jobs and growth in regions facing demographic change and ~~address~~to tackle its regional and local consequences; notes the increasing importance of the Territorial Agenda and of successful rural-urban partnerships, as well as the exemplary role of smart cities as microcosms and catalysts for innovative solutions for regional and local challenges;

Amendment 23 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas cohesion policy remains the main EU-wide investment policy for growth, competitiveness and sustainable job creation after 2020, especially against the backdrop of a sharp decline in public and private investments in many Member States and the implications of globalisation;

Amendment 230 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Suggests an increased use of ESI Funds in order to tackle demographic change and address its negative regional and local consequences; notes the increasing importance of the Territorial Agenda and of successful rural-urban partnerships, as well as the exemplary role of smart cities as microcosms and catalysts for innovative solutions for regional and local challenges;

Amendment 231 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Suggests an increased use of ESI Funds in order to tackle demographic change and address its regional and local consequences, such as depopulation; notes the increasing importance of the Territorial Agenda and of successful rural-urban partnerships, as well as the exemplary role of smart cities as microcosms and catalysts for innovative solutions for regional and local challenges;

Amendment 232 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Stresses the importance of the Europe 2020 strategy, which has been made more effective since being linked to the use of ESI Funds; notes that Europe 2020 serves as a long-term European strategy for economic, social and environmental development, which also contributes to a better awareness of cohesion policy performance; at the same time, notes that cohesion policy can also serve to fulfil the goals of sustainable development;

Amendment 233 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Insists on the need to continue to promote cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation as part of the aim of strengthening Territorial Cohesion described in article 174 TFEU, making European added value particularly visible; calls, therefore, for tripling the level of appropriations for European Territorial Cooperation within the total envelope for Cohesion policy;

Amendment 234 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Considers that European Territorial Cooperation should remain an important instrument post 2020, considering its added value and underlines that a unified legal framework and guidelines on cross-border project should be established and implemented over the diverse national legislation systems;

Amendment 235 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Notes the increasing importance of the Territorial Agenda and of successful rural-urban partnerships, as well as the exemplary role of smart cities as microcosms and catalysts for innovative solutions for regional and local challenges;

Amendment 236 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Calls for a substantially increased budget for ETC in the next programming period to provide adequate support to cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation projects;

Amendment 237 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Emphasises the role of the new territorial development tools, such as Community Led Local Development and the Integrated Territorial Investments;

Amendment 238 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)

17b. Underlines the importance of the current Interreg Europe cooperation programme for European public authorities to facilitate the exchange of experience and transfer of good practice; suggests to set enlarge the funding possibilities in the succeeding Interreg Europe-programme after 2020 to enable investments in physical pilot projects and demonstration projects with involvement of stakeholders across Europe also to be taken into account;

Amendment 239 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)

17c. Is of the opinion that creating synergies between transnational RIS3s and world-class clusters will bolster the economic development of the European Union's regions and contribute to the competitiveness of the EU;

Amendment 24 #

Ivana MALETIĆ, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Maria SPYRAKI

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas cohesion policy remains the main EU-wide investment and development policy for sustainable job creation after 2020, especially against the backdrop of a sharp decline in public and private investments in many Member States and the implications of globalisation;

Amendment 240 #

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Krzysztof HETMAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Welcomes the Pact of Amsterdam and the better recognition accorded to the role of cities and urban areas in European policy-making and demands an effective implementation of the ~~partnerships and~~ cooperative working method~~s that the Pact entails~~ through the partnerships that the Pact entails; expects the results to be incorporated in future EU policies post- 2020;

Amendment 241 #

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Krzysztof HETMAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Welcomes the Pact of Amsterdam and the better recognition accorded to the role of cities and urban areas in European policy-making and demands an effective implementation of the partnerships and cooperative working methods that the Pact entails; calls on the Commission to improve coordination between the various tools aimed at cities, while reducing the administrative burden;

Amendment 242 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Underlines the enhanced urban dimension of cohesion policy in the form of specific provisions for sustainable urban development and the urban innovative actions, and considers that it should be further developed in the future; encourages the Commission to strengthen the direct support to local governments under cohesion policy by enhancing financing and providing tailored instruments for territorial development;

Amendment 243 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Recalls the great interest in the new instrument called Urban Innovative Actions; believes that urban authorities should be equipped with more financial resources in order to answer increasingly complex challenges they face; calls, therefore, to continue with this instrument in the post 2020 period and to increase its financing;

Amendment 244 #

Raymond FINCH

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

Amendment 245 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Endorses the EU’s commitments under the Paris climate change agreement, and underlines that the ESI Funds ~~should~~play a key role in this direction and should continue to be used as effectively as possible for climate change mitigation and adaptation, as well as for green economies and renewable energies;

Amendment 246 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Endorses the EU’'s commitments under the Paris climate change agreement and underlines that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible for climate change mitigation and adaptation, as well as for green economies and renewable energies, highlights the potential of European Territorial Cooperation in this regard;

Amendment 247 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Endorses the EU’s commitments under the Paris climate change agreement and underlines that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible for climate change mitigation and adaptation, as well as for green economies and renewable energies; Urges that the current commitment of 20% spending on climate action has to be doubled and be replaced by a legally binding obligation; Considers necessary to improve the monitoring and tracking system for climate spending complemented by more appropriate impact and result indicators and the promotion of carbon accounting tools;

Amendment 248 #

Constanze KREHL

19a. Stresses that research, innovation and technology development must also play a prominent role in the future cohesion policy so that the EU can compete in global competition in these areas. Points out In this context that EU space programmes open up opportunities for the European space industry, in particular SMEs, as well as creating a wide range of applications for public administration, and underlines the need also to promote projects in this area;

Amendment 249 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. emphasises the key role of municipalities, cities and regions for implementation of the COP21 Paris agreements in the context of the EU Urban Agenda and in making use of CLLD; points to their capacity to reconcile divergent interests and to target funds according to local specificities and for facilitating the transition towards decarbonizing the economy;

Amendment 25 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas cohesion policy is one of the most highly valued EU policies, with measurable and visible results and with positive effects on GDP in all Member States and their regions;

Amendment 250 #

Raffaele FITTO

19a. Promotes the establishment of special economic zones in areas with significant divides in social and economic terms, favouring brownfield sites also in order to implement remediation, regeneration and industrial conversion processes;

Amendment 251 #

Constanze KREHL

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)

19b. Points out in this context that the digital agenda, including the provision of the necessary infrastructure, must be a priority within the framework of cohesion policy, particularly in the next funding period. Development in the telecommunications sector must in any case be accompanied by appropriate training and further training, which should also be supported by cohesion policy;

Amendment 252 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)

19b. Notes that certain categories of expenditure, such as support for fossil fuels, are harmful to citizens and the environment, and also inconsistent with the EU's long term policy objectives; calls for excluding harmful expenditure from the scope of ESIF spending as a simple tool to prevent EU funds from being used to support unsustainable projects and invest in dead-end technologies;

Amendment 253 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Highlights the fact that in order to improve the visibility of ESI Funds, greater focus must be placed on participation by stakeholders, who can act as an effective channel through which to disseminate cohesion policy achievements, and recipients; urges, furthermore, the Commission, Member States, regions and cities to communicate in a more efficient way on ~~both~~ the achievements of cohesion policy and t~~he lessons to be learned~~o convey a careful message to citizens regarding the added value of the European project for their quality of life and well-being;

Amendment 254 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. HUnderlines that in the era of euroscepticism, the increased visibility of the Cohesion Policy is vital, highlights the fact that in order to improve the visibility of ESI Funds, greater focus must be placed on participation by stakeholders and recipients; urges, furthermore, the Commission, Member States, regions and cities to communicate in a more efficient way on both the achievements of cohesion policy, particularly how it delivers the measurable change to the everyday life of EU citizens, and the lessons to be learned;

Amendment 255 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Highlights the fact that in order to improve the visibility of ESI Funds, greater focus must be placed on participation by stakeholders and recipients; urges, furthermore, the Commission, Member States, regions and cities to communicate, including by using advanced technological solutions and social networks, in a more efficient way on both the achievements of cohesion policy and the lessons to be learned;

Amendment 256 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Highlights the fact that in order to improve the visibility of ESI Funds, greater focus must be placed on participation by stakeholders and recipients; urges, furthermore, the Commission, Member States, regions and cities to communicate in a more efficient way on both the achievements of cohesion policy and the lessons to be learned; stresses the need for a specific communications budget for for the purposes of providing technical assistance and the imposition of mandatory conditions regarding advertising;

Amendment 257 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Highlights the fact that in order to improve the visibility of ESI Funds, greater focus must be placed on participation by stakeholders and recipients; urges, furthermore, the Commission, Member States, regions and cities to communicate in a more efficient way on both the achievements of cohesion policy and the lessons to be learned; invites the Commission to reconsider the rules for communication of the achievements of Cohesion Policy so that the contents and results prevail over procedures;

Amendment 258 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Highlights the fact that in order to improve the visibility of ESI Funds, greater focus must be placed on participation by stakeholders and recipients; urges, furthermore, the Commission, Member States, regions and cities to communicate in a more efficient way on both the achievements of cohesion policy and the lessons to be learned; underlines the need of a better cooperation of all actors in order to strengthen the trust between the Commission, other EU Institutions and Member States on the one hand, and between the citizens and EU Institutions on the other;

Amendment 259 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Highlights the fact that in order to improve the visibility of ESI Funds, greater focus must be placed on participation by stakeholders and recipients; urges, furthermore, the Commission, Member States, regions and cities to communicate in a more efficient way on both the achievements of cohesion policy and the lessons to be learned; calls on therefore the Commission to develop and maintain communication strategies and platforms which would comprehensively and equally promote the opportunities provided and achievement delivered by the EU's cohesion policy;

Amendment 26 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the last reform of cohesion policy in 2013 was extensive and substantial, shifting the focus of the policy towards a result-oriented approach, effectiveness and efficiency on the one hand and ~~the partnership principle~~horizontal principles including on partnership and place-based approaches on the other;

Amendment 260 #

Josu JUARISTI ABAUNZ, Younous OMARJEE, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Stresses that increased communication on and visibility of the results and successes achieved with the support of ESI Funds can contribute to regaining citizens' confidence and trust in the European project; calls, therefore, for substantially increasing the visibility of cohesion policy measures through appropriate communication actions whereby greater focus must be placed on participation by stakeholders and recipients; emphasises furthermore the importance of involving stakeholders, recipients and citizens in the design and implementation of cohesion policy in a meaningful way; urges that communication activities should continue until 4 years after closure of the project when results of a project are clearly visible;

Amendment 261 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Stresses that European territorial cooperation is a key objective of cohesion policy, the purpose of which is to promote economic, social and cultural cooperation between EU countries, and that European Territorial Cooperation (ETC) has proved successful and its potential should be developed; calls on the Commission and the Member States, therefore, to keep the ETC as an important instrument, giving it a more specific role in post-2020 cohesion policy and significantly increasing its budget;

Amendment 262 #

Josu JUARISTI ABAUNZ, Younous OMARJEE, Dimitrios PAPADIMOULIS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Recognises that challenges such as migration and security or ongoing future political developments in the EU should not negatively affect the investments through cohesion policy or its goals and expected results, especially after the current programming period;

Amendment 263 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)

20b. takes the view, in particular, that cross-border cooperation is a key instrument for the development of the border regions and that projects in this area are a true test bed for European integration; takes the view, therefore, that post-2020 cohesion policy should encourage and strengthen cross-border cooperation in areas such as connectivity and accessibility, innovation, strengthening regional identity, responding to environmental challenges, strengthening institutional capacities, health, education, employment and workforce mobility and educational and linguistic cooperation;

Amendment 264 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for the fostering of economic, social and territorial cohesion and ~~solidarity across the EU~~the steering of EU Funds towards growth, jobs and competitiveness to be put at the top of the EU agenda~~, and~~; further, asks to maintain the fight against poverty and social exclusion, as well as against discrimination;

Amendment 265 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for growth, the fostering of economic, social and territorial cohesion and solidarity across the EU to be put at the top of the EU agenda, and to maintain the fight against poverty and social exclusion, as well as against discrimination;

Amendment 266 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for the fostering of economic, social and territorial cohesion and solidarity across the EU to be put at the top of the EU agenda, and to maintain the fight against regional disparities, poverty and social exclusion, as well as against discrimination;

Amendment 267 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for the fostering of economic, social and territorial cohesion and solidarity across the EU to be put at the top of the EU agenda, and to maintain the fight against poverty and social exclusion, as well as against discrimination; Believes that the paradigm of cohesion policy needs to be re-considered with emphasis being put on tackling those regions and people that have been left behind from the competitiveness, growth and jobs agenda;

Amendment 268 #

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Krzysztof HETMAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for the fostering of economic, social and territorial cohesion and solidarity across the EU to be put at the top of the EU agenda, and to maintain the fight against poverty and social exclusion, as well as against discrimination; points out that the special needs of all regions, particularly the economic, social and geographical circumstances, should be taken into account in order to maximize the economic and social impact of future cohesion policy;

Amendment 269 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for the fostering of economic, social and territorial cohesion and solidarity across the EU to be put at the top of the EU agenda, and to maintain the fight against poverty and social exclusion, as well as against discrimination; considers that, apart from the goals enshrined in the Treaties, cohesion policy should continue serving as a tool to attain EU political objectives and remain the Union main investment policy available to all regions;

Amendment 27 #

Ivana MALETIĆ, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Maria SPYRAKI

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the last reform of cohesion policy in 2013 was extensive and substantial, shifting the focus of the policy towards a result-oriented approach, thematic concentration, effectiveness and efficiency on the one hand and the partnership principle, multi-level governance, coordination with other policies and smart specialization on the other;

Amendment 270 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Stresses that a new cohesion policy that is also credible and perceived as closer to citizens and more commensurate with the real needs and vocations of local areas is needed now more than ever;

Amendment 271 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Highlights the need for appropriate and effective communication of the results and socio-economic impact of Cohesion Policy in the Member States and in the regions;

Amendment 272 #

22. Reiterates that it is high time to prepare the post-2020 EU cohesion policy in order to ~~launch it effectively at the very start of the new programming period~~adopt the new legislative framework in due time, and avoid delays at the beginning of the new programming period, such as those which occurred in the current one; in this respect, underlines the importance that national, regional, and local authorities are able to prepare a project pipeline already before the beginning of the new programming period, in order to launch the implementation phase timely and effectively;

Amendment 273 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Reiterates that it is high time to prepare the post-2020 EU cohesion policy in order to launch it more swiftly and effectively at the very start of the new programming period;

Amendment 274 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Reiterates that it is high time to prepare the post-2020 EU cohesion policy in order to launch it effectively at the very start of the new programming period; calls on the Commission to establish, in this respect, a platform with representatives and key political decision makers of the Member States, the Commission, the European Parliament as well as other relevant stakeholders for debating the future architecture of Cohesion Policy;

Amendment 275 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

Amendment 276 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Reiterates that it is high time to prepare the post-2020 EU cohesion policy in order to launch it effectively at the very start of the new programming period; Insists that the legislative process to adopt the next MFF should be concluded by the end of 2018, so that the regulatory framework for future cohesion policy can be adopted swiftly after that and can come into force without delay on 1 January 2021, preventing the repetition of a backlog in recent periods;

Amendment 277 #

Fernando RUAS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Reiterates that it is high time to prepare the post-2020 EU cohesion policy in order to launch it effectively at the very start of the new programming period; underlines that the future cohesion policy should be adopted before the summer of 2019, bearing in mind the elections for the European Parliament which impose significant time constraints on the co- legislators;

Amendment 278 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Reiterates that it is high time to prepare the post-2020 EU cohesion policy in order to launch it effectively at the very start of the new programming period; maintains, to that end, that an interinstitutional agreement needs to be reached by autumn 2019 at the very latest;

Amendment 279 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Reiterates that it is high time to prepare the post-2020 EU cohesion policy in order to launch it effectively at the very start of the new programming period; calls therefore for timely adoption of all rules on management and control before the start of the new programming period; underlines that delayed implementation of operational programmes may affect the efficiency of cohesion policy and raises the risk of backlogs;

Amendment 28 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas the late adoption of the legislative package for the current programming period led to delays in the start of its effective implementation; whereas this should serve as a lesson, and the new legislative framework should be adopted in due time so as to allow a swift and effective start of the next programming period;

Amendment 280 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Reiterates that it is high time to prepare the post-2020 EU cohesion policy in order to launch it effectively at the very start of the new programming period; draws attention to the importance of issuing in good time, in all the official languages and in advance of the eligibility period, all documents relating to the future legal framework, and banning the retrospective application and interpretation of rules;

Amendment 281 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Reiterates that it is high time to prepare the post-2020 EU cohesion policy in order to launch it effectively at the very start of the new programming period; proposes, to that end, the funding of a pilot programme that enables studies, research and technical and economic feasibility assessments to be carried out, regarding measures to be taken in the next programming period;

Amendment 282 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Underlines that the rules on management and control should be maintained and in particular no retroactive effect of new rules, including the application of Commission guidelines should be applied;

Amendment 283 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Notes that the core of the current cohesion policy legislative framework should be maintained after 2020 with a simplified, differentiated, refined, easily accessible and result- orientated policy that benefits all the European regions and with an added value of the policy which is better communicated to citizens; insists on the need to maintain, and even reinforce, the specific tools for the outermost regions as part of future cohesion policy;

Amendment 284 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Notes that the core of the current cohesion policy legislative framework should be maintained after 2020 with a refined, strengthened, easily accessible and result- orientated policy and with an added value of the policy which is better communicated to citizens;

Amendment 285 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Notes that the core of the current cohesion policy legislative framework should be maintained after 2020 with a refined, easily accessible and result- orientated policy and with an added value of the policy which is better communicated to citizens; asks the European Commission to present the proposal for the new Regulation in early 2018, so as to enable a proper discussion with the European Parliament and the Council and a timely approval of the new legislative framework;

Amendment 286 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Considers that the smart specialisation model should be further developed and become the main approach in the cohesion policy by encouraging cooperation between more-developed and less-developed regions, urban and rural areas and facilitating EU integration; underlines that it also ensures the strategic cooperation as an essential component and emphasizes towards global value chains, the search for synergies with other regions and the creation of trans-regional collaborations and networks;

Amendment 287 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Believes that the cross-border element of territorial cohesion should be strengthened; takes the view, therefore, that the spirit of smart specialisation and innovation must remain an important driver of cohesion policy;

Amendment 288 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Calls for the financial share of cohesion policy to be increased in relation to the overall plan for the post-2020 financial perspective, or maintained at the same level as under the current plan;

Amendment 289 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

Amendment 29 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas the renewed cohesion policy resulted in a gradual shift of focus from one based on major infrastructure- related projects towards one based on stimulating the knowledge economy and innovation;

Amendment 290 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

Amendment 291 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Stresses in view of the Commission’s proposal 2016/0282(COD) that the reception of migrants and refugees as well as their social and economic integration requires a coherent transnational approach, which should also be addressed through the current and future EU cohesion policythe need to fund, as part of cohesion policy, internationalisation programmes for businesses which seek to pave the way for the establishment of a favourable environment for people who are currently being forced to emigrate, not by promoting illegal immigration but by ensuring that these people can remain in their own countries in decent conditions;

Amendment 292 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Stresses in view of the Commission’s proposal 2016/0282(COD) that the reception of migrants and refugees as well as their social and economic integration requires a coherent transnational approach~~, which should also be addressed through the current and future EU cohesion policy~~; considers that the contribution from Cohesion Policy could, however, be effective, especially in countries particularly exposed to migration flows only if accompanied by a genuine Europe-wide application of the principle of solidarity, and thus by actions aimed at a fair burden-sharing and at sustainable mutual assistance among the Member States;

Amendment 293 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Stresses in view of the Commission’s proposal 2016/0282(COD) that the reception of legal migrants and refugees as well as their social and economic integration requires a coherent transnational approach, which should also be addressed through the current and future EU cohesion policy;

Amendment 294 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Is convinced of the need for an adequate budget for cohesion policy after 2020 ~~which takes into account~~, on a par with current levels, if not higher, in the light of the complex internal and external challenges that the policy will have to address; considers it useful to launch a debate on the introduction of new cohesion budget support mechanisms, such as new forms of own resources, to neutralise the possible cuts resulting from the exit of the United Kingdom;

Amendment 295 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. ~~Is convinced of~~Underlines the need for an adequately increased budget for cohesion policy after 2020, which takes into account the complex internal and external challenges that the policy will have to address;

Amendment 296 #

25. Is convinced of the need for an adequate budget for cohesion policy after 2020 which takes into account the complex internal and external challenges relevant to its objectives as laid down in the Treaties that the policy will have to address;

Amendment 297 #

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Krzysztof HETMAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Is convinced of the need for an adequate budget for cohesion policy after 2020 which takes into account the complex internal and external challenges that the policy will have to address and which does not penalise disadvantaged areas in the give-and-take relationship with the EU;

Amendment 298 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Is convinced of the need for an adequate budget for cohesion policy after 2020 which takes into account the complex internal and external challenges that the policy will have to address; calls for the share of cohesion policy in the total EU budget to be maintained in the future;

Amendment 299 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Andrea COZZOLINO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Calls on the UK and the EU to agree that UK regions and local authorities be allowed to continue to participate in European Territorial Cooperation and other EU-wide programmes in a similar way that non-EU Member States such as Norway or Iceland do;

Amendment 3 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)

– having regard to the European Parliament resolution on 'A European Strategy for the Danube Region' of 21 January 2010, P7_TA (2010) 0008, the European Parliament resolution on 'A European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and the role of macro-regions in the future cohesion policy' of 6 July 2010, P7_TA (2010) 0254, the European Parliament resolution on 'an EU strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian region' of 28 October 2015, P8_TA (2015) 0383, and the European Parliament resolution on 'An EU Strategy for the Alpine Region' of 13 September 2016, P8_TA (2016) 0336,

Amendment 30 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas these principles should be maintained and consolidated after 2020 in order to ensure sound economic governance, continuity, legal certainty, accessibility and transparency of policy implementation;

Amendment 300 #

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Krzysztof HETMAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Underlines the multi-annual nature of cohesion policy and calls to maintain its 7-year programming period or to introduce a 5+5 years programming period with an obligatory mid-term revision;

Amendment 301 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission as well as the Member States and their parliaments and the Committee of the Regions.

Amendment 31 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas these principles should be maintained and consolidated after 2020 in order to ensure continuity, visibility, legal certainty, accessibility and transparency of policy implementation;

Amendment 32 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas in order to render the cohesion policy a success, it is essential to reduce the administrative burden for its beneficiaries, as it today often is perceived as too complex;

Amendment 33 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas, in order for a post-2020 cohesion policy to be able to realise its full potential, the rules need to be radically simplified and thought needs to be given to increasing proportionality and introducing arrangements for differentiated implementation of programmes coming under the ESI Funds;

Amendment 34 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas cohesion policy has played a vital role and has shown significant responsiveness to macroeconomic and fiscal constraints, supporting the most pressing needs and strengthening certain interventions;

Amendment 35 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Andrea COZZOLINO

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas EU cohesion policy has more elements of solidarity than national cohesion policies, since it is far more effective particularly in promoting various forms of territorial cooperation;

Amendment 36 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas ~~neither~~ the increasing constraints on both the EU and the national budgets ~~nor~~and the consequences of Brexit should not lead to EU cohesion policy being weakened;

Amendment 37 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas cohesion policy already addresses a very wide range of challenges and cannot be expected to tackle all new challenges the EU may face with ~~the same – or an even smaller – budget~~out a budgetary increase;

Amendment 38 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas cohesion policy already addresses a very wide range of challenges relevant to its objectives as laid down in the Treaties and cannot be expected to tackle all new challenges the EU may face with the same – or an even smaller – budget;

Amendment 39 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas cohesion policy already addresses a very wide range of challenges and cannot be expected to tackle all new challenges the EU may face with the same – or an even smaller – budget, although the outcome may be bigger by allowing for more flexibility for Member States, regions and cities to support new policy challenges;

Amendment 4 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 19 a (new)

– having regard to all its resolutions on the outermost regions, in particular the resolution on the role of cohesion policy in the outermost regions of the EU in the context of the Europe 2020 Strategy and that on optimising the potential of outermost regions by creating synergies between the Structural Funds and other EU programmes,

Amendment 40 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas the arbitrary suspension of ESI Funds related to the failed implementation of other EU policies and objectives would strongly undermine the effectiveness of cohesion policy;

Amendment 41 #

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas it is the main instrument supporting inclusive and smart growth in all EU regions;

Amendment 42 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph -1 (new)

–1. Strongly opposes any scenario for the EU27 by 2025, as contained in the White Paper on the Future of Europe, which would scale down the EU's efforts in relation to cohesion policy. On the contrary, invites the Commission to present a comprehensive legislative proposal for a strong and effective Cohesion Policy post-2020;

Amendment 43 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines that growth and regional, economic and social convergence cannot be achieved without good governance and the effective involvement of all partners at national, regional and local level, as is enshrined in the partnership principle (Article 5 of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR)); reiterates that the EU cohesion policy’s shared management ~~arrangement~~ensures better ownership of and responsibility for the policy implementation on the ground among all stakeholders involved and provides the EU with a unique tool to directly address the concerns of citizens in relation to internal and external challenges; is of the opinion that shared management is of more significant value than simple shared implementation or administration as it provides for establishment, implementation and financial management of the funds as well as strategic coverage of various policies on the national and European level and the involvement of the European, national and regional authorities;

Amendment 44 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

Amendment 45 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines that growth and regional, economic and social convergence cannot be achieved without good governance, cooperation, mutual trust and the effective involvement of all partners at national, regional and local level, as is enshrined in the partnership principle (Article 5 of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR)); reiterates that the EU cohesion policy’'s shared management arrangement provides the EU with a unique tool to directly address the concerns of citizens in relation to internal and external challenges;

Amendment 46 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines that growth and regional, economic and social convergence cannot be achieved without good governance and the effective involvement of all partners at national, regional and local level, as is enshrined in the partnership principle (Article 5 of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR)); acknowledges, however, that, in some cases, in the current programming period, the principles underlying the consultation process of the relevant stakeholders have been respected only from a formal point of view and calls thus for a more binding European Code of Conduct for the post- 2020 framework; asks the Commission, in this regard, to consider proposing a specific ex-ante conditionality on the partnership, that would aim at actually boosting the multilevel governance and at increasing the participation and the involvement of civil society both in the design and in the implementation of Cohesion Policy; reiterates that the EU cohesion policy’s shared management arrangement provides the EU with a unique tool to directly address the concerns of citizens in relation to internal and external challenges;

Amendment 47 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines that growth and regional, economic and social convergence cannot be achieved without good governance and the effective involvement of all partners at national, regional and local level, as is enshrined in the partnership principle (Article 5 of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR)); reiterates that the EU cohesion policy’s shared management arrangement provides the EU with a unique tool to directly address the concerns of citizens in relation to internal and external challenges; reiterates that the EU cohesion policy's shared management arrangement, which is based on the partnership principle, multilevel governance and the coordination of different administrative levels but also sectors, is a unique feature that contributes to effective implementation of European policies;

Amendment 48 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Emphasises the importance of maintaining the shared management model and thus ensuring a better ownership and responsibility for the policy implementation among all stakeholders involved. There is a need to precise the roles and responsibilities of all stakeholders and to establish a clear division of their competencies, with special emphasis on restoring trust between the Commission, other EU institutions and Member States;

Amendment 49 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. HUnderlines that Cohesion Policy plays a key role in the realisation of EU objectives across Europe and it is therefore essential that Cohesion policy post-2020 covers all European regions; therefore, highlights the horizontal and cross- cutting approach of cohesion policy;

Amendment 5 #

Fernando RUAS

Motion for a resolution
Citation 19 a (new)

– having regard to its resolution of 28 October 2015 'on cohesion policy and the review of the Europe 2020 strategy',

Amendment 50 #

Ivana MALETIĆ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Maria SPYRAKI, Stanislav POLČÁK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises the catalyst effects of cohesion policy and its learning points for administrations, among beneficiaries and stakeholders as regards long-term strategic thinking, public involvement, capacity building and cooperation; Highlights the horizontal and cross- cutting approach of cohesion policy;

Amendment 51 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights the horizontal and cross- cutting approach of cohesion policy; therefore calls on better coordination and cooperation among DGs in the European Commission responsible for different EU policies and with DG responsible for Cohesion policy as well as among ministries and regional/local authorities at the level of member states and with managing authority/ies;

Amendment 52 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights the horizontal and cross- cutting approach of cohesion policy, providing a framework for mobilising and coordinating national and subnational actors and directly engaging them in working together towards reaching EU priorities through co-financed projects;

Amendment 53 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Highlights the horizontal and cross- cutting approach of cohesion policy; one of those few policies which are smart, sustainable and inclusive at the same time;

Amendment 54 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that cohesion policy is unique in that it allows a place-based approach able to identify territorial specificities, sets clear objectives and obtains measurable results, promotes a multi-level governance strategy and supports the integration of EU, national and regional instruments and policies;

Amendment 55 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Highlights the fact that cohesion policy funds contribute to growth and convergence if they are properly directed towards high-quality projects; stresses the importance of national policies being in line with EU priorities;

Amendment 56 #

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Krzysztof HETMAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. ~~Welcomes~~Regrets the late adoption of several operational programmes and the late designation of the Managing Authorities in some Member States; underlines that faster take-up of the available funds is vital in future, with a more balanced progression of expenditure during the programming cycle, also in order to avoid frequently turning to 'retrospective' projects, which are often funded with the sole aim of avoiding automatic decommitment; takes note of the acceleration in thed implementation of the operational programmes during the year 2016 and strongly encourages all actors involved to continue to speed up their activities;

Amendment 57 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Welcomes the first signs of the accelerated implementation of the operational programmes observed during the year 2016; urges the Commission to identify the causes of the delays in implementation to avoid similar problems at the beginning of the next programming period and strongly encourages all actors involved to continue to speed up their activities;

Amendment 58 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Welcomes the accelerated implementation of the operational programmes during the year 2016 ~~and strongly encourages all actors involved to continue to speed up their activiti~~; calls for even greater efforts, above all at the level of Member States and local authorities, to promote the use of the allocated funds and the practical realisation of the planned activities; calls on all actors involved to concentrate resources in favour of strategic infrastructure measures;

Amendment 59 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Michela GIUFFRIDA, Andrea COZZOLINO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Welcomes the accelerated implementation of the operational programmes during the year 2016 and strongly encourages all actors involved to continue to speed up and improve the quality of their activities;

Amendment 6 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 20

– having regard to the conclusions and recommendations of the ‘Hhigh Llevel Ggroup ~~monitoring~~for the simplification ~~for~~of access by beneficiaries tof ESI funds’,

Amendment 60 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Welcomes the accelerated implementation of the operational programmes during the year 2016 and strongly encourages all actors involved to continue to speed up their activities; stresses that it is essential for accelerated implementation of operational programmes that managing authorities do not, once a call procedure has been completed, then cancel them; considers that where this happens, and where the process is not duly justified, the managing authority must repay the eligible costs incurred by an applicant in connection with an application under the call;

Amendment 61 #

Ivana MALETIĆ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Maria SPYRAKI, Stanislav POLČÁK

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

Amendment 62 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Welcomes the accelerated implementation of the operational programmes during the year 2016 and strongly encourages all actors involved to continue to speed up their activities; recalls Commission to prepare implementation plan to accelerate ESI Funds implementation and to continue with Task Force set in 2014 for 2007-2013 period in order to support and accelerate implementation of 2014-2020 programmes;

Amendment 63 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Calls on the EU to monitor the implementation and management of the operational programmes in those Member States which are lagging furthest behind; calls on the Commission to assess the possible implementation of specific actions to speed up the process;

Amendment 64 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Recognises that in some Member States the partnership principle has led to closer cooperation with regional and local authorities, while ~~there is still room for improvement~~a lot needs to be done in order to ensure the real and early involvement of all stakeholders including from civil society;

Amendment 65 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Recognises that in some Member States the partnership principle has led to closer cooperation with regional and local authorities, while there is still room for improvement in order to ensure the real and early involvement of all stakeholders; underlines that involvement of stakeholders should continue to happen in accordance with the multi-level governance approach; is of the opinion that the partnership principle should be further strengthened in the future, by for example considering to make the partnership principle and the code of conduct legally binding;

Amendment 66 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Recognises that in some Member States the partnership principle has led to closer cooperation with regional and local authorities, while there is still room for improvement in order to ensure the real and early involvement of all stakeholders; calls on local and regional authorities to identify ways of involving citizens and organisations in the decision-making process with a view to ensuring increased accountability in the implementation of cohesion policy;

Amendment 67 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

Amendment 68 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that although cohesion policy has mitigated the impact of the ~~crisis~~recent economic and financial crisis in the EU, regional disparities and social inequalities remain high; calls for continuous action to reduce existing disparities~~, particularly in less developed regions, while maintaining support for transition and for more developed~~ and to prevent the development of new disparities in all types of regions, so as to facilitate ownership of the policy in ~~all reg~~the whole Unions;

Amendment 69 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that ~~although cohesion policy has~~convergence among the regions was improving before the crisis thanks to cohesion policy; notes that in the years of crisis cohesion policy mitigated ~~the~~its impact ~~of the crisis,~~; is, however, still of the opinion that regional disparities and social inequalities remain high; calls for continuous action to reduce disparities, particularly in less developed regions, while maintaining support for transition and for more developed regions so as to facilitate ownership of the policy in all regions;

Amendment 7 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Citation 20 a (new)

– having regard to the Council conclusions on the 2016 European Court of Auditors' special report n°31, 'Spending at least one euro in every five from the EU budget on climate action: ambitious work underway, but serious risk of falling short', adopted on 21 March 2017,

Amendment 70 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that although cohesion policy ~~has~~represents an effective form of investment which plays a useful role in mitigateding the impact of the crisis, regional disparities, disparities in competitiveness and social inequalities remain high; calls for continuous action to reduce disparities, particularly in less developed regions and the regions referred to in Articles 174 and 349 TFEU, while maintaining support for transition and for more developed regions so as to facilitate ownership of the policy in all regions;

Amendment 71 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that although cohesion policy has mitigated the impact of the crisis and of the austerity measures, regional disparities and social inequalities remain high; calls for continuous action to reduce disparities, particularly in less developed regions, while maintaining support for transition and for more developed regions so as to facilitate ownership of the policy in all regions;

Amendment 72 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that although cohesion policy has mitigated the impact of the crisis, regional disparities and social inequalities remain high; calls for ~~continuous~~strengthened action to reduce disparities, particularly in less developed regions, while maintaining support for transition and for more developed regions so as to facilitate ownership of the policy in all regions;

Amendment 73 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that although cohesion policy has mitigated the impact of the crisis, regional disparities and social inequalities remain high; calls for continuous action to reduce disparities and avoid new divergences, particularly in less developed regions, while maintaining support for transition and for more developed regions so as to facilitate ownership of the policy in all regions;

Amendment 74 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that although cohesion policy has mitigated the impact of the crisis, regional disparities and social inequalities remain high; calls for continuous action to reduce disparities, particularly in less developed regions, while maintaining and consolidating support for transition and for more developed regions so as to facilitate ownership of the policy in all regions;

Amendment 75 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that although cohesion policy has mitigated the impact of the crisis, regional disparities and social inequalities remain high; calls for continuous action to reduce disparities, particularly in less developed regions, while maintaining support for transition and for more developed regions so as to facilitate ownership of the policy in all regions, including through the establishment of special economic zones aimed at developing particular sectors locally;

Amendment 76 #

Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that although cohesion policy has mitigated the impact of the crisis, regional disparities and social inequalities remain high; calls for continuous action to reduce disparities, particularly in less developed regions, while maintaining support for transition and for more developed regions so as to facilitate ownership of the policy in all regions; proper consideration should be given also to the regions which may, due to spill-over and networking effects, have significant influence on the development of the entire country;

Amendment 77 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Notes, however, that the persistence of macroeconomic imbalances within the Union has resulted in a diversified impact of Cohesion Policy investments; calls on the Commission therefore to develop adequate compensation mechanisms that reduce these distortions by maximising the impact of cohesion policy across the Union;

Amendment 78 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Considers that more attention needs to be paid to making European regions more resilient towards sudden shocks and all sorts of crisis, including by drawing comprehensive conclusions from the severe economic and social crisis of the past years and the role of cohesion policy;

Amendment 79 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Points out that European territorial cooperation adds substantial added value to realise EU objectives and encourages solidarity between European regions and its neighbours; stresses that territorial cooperation in all its forms, including macro-regional strategies, transposes the concept of political cooperation and coordination of regions and citizens across borders in the EU; underlines the merit of cohesion policy in addressing the specific challenges ofinherent to islands, outermost and northernmost sparsely populated regions while calls for improving the territorial dimension of Cohesion Policy mentioned under articles 174 and 349 TFEU;

Amendment 8 #

Motion for a resolution
Citation 21 a (new)

– having regard to the Court of Justice judgment of 15 December 2015 on the interpretation of Article 349 of the TFEU,

Amendment 80 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Points out that territorial cooperation in all its forms, including macro-regional strategies, transposes the concept of political cooperation and coordination of regions and citizens across borders in the EU; underlines the merit of cohesion policy in addressing the specific challenges of outermost ~~and northernmost sparsely populated regions~~regions, on the basis of Article 349 of the TFEU, and of northernmost sparsely populated regions, on the basis of Article 174 of the TFEU;

Amendment 81 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Points out that territorial cooperation in all its forms, including macro-regional strategies, transposes the concept of political cooperation and coordination of regions and citizens across borders in the EU; underlines the merit of cohesion policy in addressing the challenges of border, outermost and northernmost sparsely populated regions;

Amendment 82 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Points out that territorial cooperation in all its forms, including macro-regional strategies, transposes the concept of political cooperation and coordination of regions and citizens across borders in the EU; underlines the merit of cohesion policy in addressing the challenges of outermost ~~and northernmost~~, peripheral and sparsely populated regions;

Amendment 83 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Points out that territorial cooperation in all its forms, including macro-regional strategies, transposes the concept of political cooperation and coordination of regions and citizens across borders in the EU; considers that the current budgetary allocations are not sufficient to effectively support cross- border cooperation; underlines the merit of cohesion policy in addressing the challenges of outermost and northernmost sparsely populated regions;

Amendment 84 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Points out that, under Article 349 of the TFEU, outermost regions enjoy special access to structural funding; calls for all outermost regions to be treated as less developed regions in the future, irrespective of their actual levels of development; believes that, in the next programming period, outermost regions should retain their budget allocations and be able to lay down some priority axes for the use of ESI Funds, in order to offset their structural disadvantages;

Amendment 85 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Notes that European Territorial Cooperation (ETC) has become an important goal of cohesion policy for 2014-2020; underlines, however, that the current ETC budget does not match the great challenges that Interreg programmes have to meet, and does not reflect the high level of its European added value;

Amendment 86 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Takes the view that cohesion policy should be given greater flexibility in the next programming period by ensuring a minimum degree of regulation at European level, complemented by national provisions, without imposing new restrictions or increasing the administrative burden on the Member States;

Amendment 87 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Stresses the importance, for countries that participate, of territorial cooperation in the area of cross-border cooperation with non-Member States in the EU integration process;

Amendment 88 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic objectives and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as an unallocated reserve or a simplification of re-programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each regionemphasizes that addressing long term objectives should remain the core function of cohesion policy;

Amendment 89 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic objectives and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as ~~an unallocated reserve or~~ a simplification of re- programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to ~~unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region~~changing needs of each region, without impacting on the strategic focus and planning certainty of multi- annual programmes for regional and local authorities;

Amendment 9 #

Matthijs van MILTENBURG, Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS, Urmas PAET

Motion for a resolution
Citation 22 a (new)

– having regard to the Joint Paper of the Visegrad Group, Bulgaria, Croatia, Romania and Slovenia on Cohesion Policy after 2020, adopted on 2 March 2017 in Warsaw by the ministers responsible for cohesion policy,

Amendment 90 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic objectives and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as ~~an unallocated reserve or~~ a simplification of re- programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events ~~and to the specific needs of each region~~; reiterates, nevertheless, that re- programming should only take place in exceptional circumstances, in order to ensure the stability and predictability of the multiannual investment strategy;

Amendment 91 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the introduced reforms such as thematic objectives and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as ~~an unallocated reserve or a~~ simplification of re- programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region;

Amendment 92 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic objectives and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; ~~asks the Commission to present ideas for greater~~emphasizes that addressing long term objectives should remain the core function of Cohesion policy; asks the European Commission to introduce additional proposals of flexibility measures, such as an unallocated reserve or a simplification of re-programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region;

Amendment 93 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic objectives and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy ~~and should be consolidated~~; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as an unallocated reserve or a simplification of re-programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region;

Amendment 94 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic ~~objectives~~concentration and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as an unallocated reserve or a simplification of re-programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region;

Amendment 95 #

Mercedes BRESSO, Andrea COZZOLINO, Michela GIUFFRIDA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the special arrangements for outermost regions, the thematic objectives and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as an unallocated reserve or a simplification of re-programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region;

Amendment 96 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

Amendment 97 #

Ivana MALETIĆ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Maria SPYRAKI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic objectives and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as an unallocated reserve or a simplification of re-programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region; stresses that the success of shared management depends not only on the EU but on the efforts made by the Member States, therefore calls for the application of "national declarations" to ensure that political responsibility is taken for the management of EU funds by national and regional authorities;

Amendment 98 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic objectives and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as an unallocated reserve or a simplification of re-programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region as well as to create incentives for the best performing regions; calls on the Commission to use more precise indicators to measure performance;

Amendment 99 #

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic objectives and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as an unallocated reserve or a simplification of re-programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region; in addition, it considers useful to create a reserve for unforeseen events that may arise during the programming period;

source: 602.804

2017/04/05 BUDG 20 amendments...

Amendment 1 #

Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. SMaintains that cohesion policy is the most visible, palpable, and quantifiable expression of European solidarity and fairness and has been instrumental in mitigating the effects of the crisis within the EU; stresses that in the last few years cohesion policy has become the main EU investment policy and a tool for attaining the general political objectives of the Union in addition to the specific goals enshrined in the Treaties; is of the opinion that cohesion policy post 2020 should continue to serve this purpose and remain a policy for all Member States and regions; considers, th~~erefore,~~at this policy must not be weakened under any circumstances, Brexit included, and that its share in the total EU budget should be maintained in the future;

Amendment 10 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Calls on the Commission to conduct analysis on risks and the level of potential decommitments in 2018 and to prepare an action plan per Member State to avoid decommitments; decommitments resulting from the total or partial non- implementation of the ESI Funds should be made available again in the EU budget;

Amendment 11 #

Derek VAUGHAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines the increasing need for flexibility in the EU budget in general, including in cohesion policy; encourages the Commission to explore different solutions that would enable the policy to be readily adapted to new challenges during a programming periodimplementation of the EU budget as a whole, including in cohesion policy in order to address new challenges during a programming period; encourages the Commission to explore different solutions in this respect; considers the creation of a reserve at EU level an interesting option in this context; believes, however, that efforts in this regard should be made both at EU level and at national and regional levels; calls for more flexibility for Member States~~, while~~ in supporting the shared ~~management implementation~~ method;

Amendment 12 #

Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines the increasing need for flexibility in the EU budget in general, in~~cluding in cohesion polic~~ order to cope with unforeseen events; considers that cohesion policy should also be made more flexible and, without undermining thematic concentration, facilitate reprogramming as and where necessary; encourages the Commission to explore different solutions that would enable the policy to be readily adapted to new challenges during a programming period~~; considers~~ and to determine whether the creation of a reserve at EU level might be an interesting option in this context; believes, however, that efforts in this regard should be made both at EU level and at national and regional levels; also calls for more flexibility and simplification in policy implementation for Member States and regions, while supporting the shared management implementation method, which is the best way of dealing with the many and varied challenges that this policy has to tackle;

Amendment 13 #

Urmas PAET, Nils TORVALDS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines the increasing need for flexibility in the EU budget in general, including in cohesion policy; encourages the Commission to explore different solutions that would enable the policy to be readily adapted to new challenges during a programming period; considers the creation of a reserve at EU level an interesting option in this context; believes, however, that efforts in this regard should be made both at EU level and at national and regional levels; calls for flexibility and early allocation of performance reserve as well as for more flexibility for Member States, while supporting the shared management implementation method; stresses that the success under the shared management is linked to the efforts made by Member States, their political will and responsibility for programming and implementation as well as the overall management and control system and its proper and sound functioning;

Amendment 14 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines the increasing need for flexibility in the EU budget in general, ~~including~~notably in cohesion policy; encourages the Commission to explore different solutions that would enable the policy to be readily adapted to new challenges during a programming period; considers the creation of a reserve at EU level an interesting option in this context; believes, however, that efforts in this regard should be made both at EU level and at national and regional levels; calls for more flexibility for Member States, while supporting the shared management implementation method;

Amendment 15 #

Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Considers the linkage between cohesion policy and economic governance to be sharply at odds with the aims of cohesion policy, namely reducing development gaps between Europe’s countries and regions by promoting the economic, social, and territorial cohesion of the EU as a whole, as laid down in the Treaties;

Amendment 16 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Encourages the Commission to reflect on different indicators beyond the GDP that would allow for a just distribution of funds under cohesion policy in order to respond to new types of inequalities between EU regions that are arising and going beyond the economic development;

Amendment 17 #

Urmas PAET, Gérard DEPREZ, Louis MICHEL, Nils TORVALDS

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Stresses the importance of endorsing simplification and coherence of the cohesion policy to minimise many different sets of rules and to make financing more efficient;

Amendment 18 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Notes the increasing role of financial instruments that by their very nature provide a complementary way of financial support from the EU budget as compared to subsidies and grants; encourages the Commission to reflect on a proper balance between grants and financial instruments under cohesion policy in the next financial framework while stressing that the latter are not suitable for all types of interventions, many of which are supported notably under cohesion policy; underlines that increasing use of financial instruments should not lead to a reduction in the Union budget in general;

Amendment 19 #

Urmas PAET

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Calls for sufficient auditing and control over the financing of programmes to ensure scrutiny and also to maximise visibility of the cohesion policy;

Amendment 2 #

Nicola CAPUTO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that in the last few years cohesion policy has become the main EU investment policy and a tool for attaining the general political objectives of the Union in addition to the specific goals enshrined in the Treaties; is of the opinion that cohesion policy post 2020 should continue to ~~serve this purpose~~reduce regional disparities while promoting economic, social and territorial cohesion among all regions across the EU and remain a policy for all Member States and regions; considers, therefore, that its share in the total EU budget should be maintained in the future;

Amendment 20 #

Ingeborg GRÄSSLE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Points to the importance of stability in the rules and maintains that continuity of regulation can do much to ensure that EU funding is used efficiently; calls on the Commission, when drawing up the allocation arrangements for the next MFF, to keep changes to a minimum so as to enable the administrations responsible for implementing and overseeing EU funds to benefit from experience and learning effects;

Amendment 3 #

Derek VAUGHAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that inover the last ~~few year~~decades cohesion policy has become the main EU investment policy and a tool for attaining the general political objectives of the Union in addition to the specific goals enshrined in the Treaties; is of the opinion that cohesion policy post 2020 should continue to serve this ~~purpose and~~goal, as well as remaining a policy for all Member States and regions; considers, therefore, that its share in the total EU budget should be maintained in the future and not weakened by siphoning off means to pay for new challenges;

Amendment 4 #

Lefteris CHRISTOFOROU

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that in the last few years cohesion policy, as a structural policy, has become the main EU investment policy and a tool for attaining the general political objectives of the Union in addition to the specific goals enshrined in the Treaties; is of the opinion that cohesion policy post 2020 should continue to serve this purpose and remain a policy expressing European solidarity for all Member States and regions; considers, therefore, that its share in the total EU budget should be maintained in the future;

Amendment 5 #

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Proposals on the extension of the European Fund for Strategic Investments should not aim at replacing or reducing the budget of the European Structural and Investment Funds;

Amendment 6 #

Derek VAUGHAN

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Notes the shortcomings of the financial planning and implementation system that led to the accumulation of unpaid bills and the build-up of an unprecedented backlog that rolled over from the last MFF to the current one; is increasingly concerned about the slow start-up of the implementation of the 2014- 2020 operational programmes, which may lead to the same situation in the future; calls on the Commission to come up with a structural solution to solve such problems before the end of the current MFF and to prevent them from ~~happening again~~spilling over into the next MFF;

Amendment 7 #