Awaiting committee decision
2017/2040(INI) Implementation of EU macro-regional strategies
Next event: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading 2017/12/11
Lead committee dossier: REGI/8/09434
Legal Basis RoP 052
Next event: Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading 2017/12/11
| Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
|---|---|---|---|
| Opinion | ENVI | BORZAN Biljana (S&D) | |
| Lead | REGI | COZZOLINO Andrea (S&D) | BOGOVIČ Franc (EPP), PORĘBA Tomasz Piotr (ECR), JAKOVČIĆ Ivan (ALDE), PAPADIMOULIS Dimitrios (GUE/NGL), ŠKRLEC Davor (Verts/ALE), D'AMATO Rosa (EFD) |
Legal Basis RoP 052
Activites
-
2017/12/11
Indicative plenary sitting date, 1st reading/single reading
- #3531
-
2017/04/25
Council Meeting
-
2017/03/16
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
-
2016/12/16
Non-legislative basic document published
-
COM(2016)0805
summary
PURPOSE: to assess the state of progress of the implementation of the Union's macro-regional strategies. BACKGROUND: several EU countries and regions have introduced macro-regional strategies to complement their traditional national policies for territorial management. These strategies are designed to address common challenges, such as innovation-driven growth, environment or climate change. Reducing regional disparities is part of their objectives, as is the synergies they create for growth and employment in the regions concerned. The four macro-regional strategies developed so far concern: the Baltic Sea region (EUSBSR) (2009); the Danube Region (EUSDR) (2011); the Adriatic and Ionian Sea region (EUSAIR) (2014) the Alpine Region (EUSALP) (2016). These strategies, which involve 19 EU Member States and 8 third countries, are now an integral part of the Union's strategic framework. They reinforce the synergies between the various instruments and policies of the Union and add value to the cooperation dimension of cohesion policy. They can be supported through programmes under the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds), and in particular Interreg. Macro-regional strategies have become an important instrument in relations between the Member States and neighbouring countries, both with the accession countries and with those benefiting from the Neighbourhood Policy (Eastern Partnership), the northern periphery and of the Arctic region. CONTENT: this report assesses progress in the implementation of these strategies, takes stock of the main findings and presents recommendations on possible further developments in the light of future cohesion policy. The report concludes that although macroregional strategies have delivered their first results, they have not yet shown their full potential. Efforts are needed to ensure the effectiveness of governance systems and to focus on results, funding and the relationship with third countries. The Member States which have initiated the cooperation processes should also assume greater responsibilities. The main recommendations contained in the report are as follows: Better policy-making and planning: these strategies are gradually being taken into account in the EU’s strategic fields, for example, research, climate and the environment. However, they are integrated to differing degrees in national or regional programmes, especially in programmes financed by the ESI Funds. The strategies have strengthened cooperation in certain strategic areas, such as the Danube Navigability Master Plan or the extension of the Baltic Energy Market Interconnection Plan. However, the report calls for better coordination within and between the countries involved in order to produce the expected results, stressing that collective steering and a common sense of purpose based on a long-term perspective should remain the basis for macro-regional cooperation. Improved governance: the strategies involve a governance structure at three levels: policy-making, coordination and operations. They emphasise the optimal use of existing financial sources (e.g. ESI Funds, Horizon 2020, COSME and LIFE), the better implementation of existing legislation and the better use of existing institutions. The success of the strategies depends on their satisfactory implementation in the coming years, as well as their ability to adapt to changing circumstances, for example, the migration crisis. More progress needs to be made in the governance of macro-regional strategies to improve their effectiveness. This supposes : the regular assessment of the effectiveness of the governance systems of each strategy to make the necessary adjustments; sectoral ministries make a stronger commitment to achieving the objectives of the macro-regional strategies, which implies a periodic rotation of the thematic area coordinators; close cooperation between the steering group members and the programme management authorities supported by the ESI Funds or other instruments; the strengthening of the links between macro-regional strategies with support from the EU’s INTERACT programme. Focussing on results: in the absence of clearly defined indicators and objectives, it is difficult to assess the extent to which the planned objectives have been met. The report calls for a robust monitoring system based on results-oriented action to enable each strategy to be measured, directed and summarised in order to guide decision-making. It is also necessary to: (i) improve the quality of projects and processes and ensure the sustainability of their results, as well as the link between project results and policy actions; (ii) increase awareness of the value-added and outcomes of strategies for critical review; (iii) further explore thematic platforms in order to strengthen strategies’ thematic focus. Better use of funding mechanisms: where strategies do not have a specific budget, there is a need for better coordinated use of the funding mechanisms available at different levels. The report recommends continuing the dialogue between ESI Fund programme authorities and those responsible for the implementation of macro-regional strategies in order to adapt funding in the most appropriate and cost-effective manner possible. In general, the Commission believes that macro-regional strategies call for the creation of closer links between the EU’s strategic areas and its funds.
- DG {'url': 'http://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/regional-and-urban-policy_en', 'title': 'Regional and Urban Policy'}, CREȚU Corina
-
COM(2016)0805
summary
Documents
- Non-legislative basic document published: COM(2016)0805
| Amendments | Dossier |
| 227 |
2017/2040(INI)
2017/07/06
ENVI
73 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Welcomes the Commission
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Urges all macro regional strategies to assess the potential benefits of collective action in reduction of greenhouse gas and pollutant emissions, biodiversity and environmental protection and ecosystem based climate change adaptation strategies;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Considers the macro-regional strategies and associated environmental programmes a good instrument to make benefits of European cooperation visible to the citizens and therefore urges all involved parties to fully commit to the strategies and play their part in the implementation;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Calls for the timely adoption of maritime spatial planning and integrated coastal management strategies by the EU Member States, as well as coastal candidate and potential candidate countries;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Points out that in rural areas nature is the economic base for many inhabitants and that environmental programmes can only be successful if supported by the local inhabitants; stresses, therefore, that in order to deliver on environment protection goals such projects must fully take into account the long-term economic interests of locals;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Urges all macro regional strategies to implement circular economy with the aim to achieve higher levels of environmental protection, health protection and non-toxic material cycles;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 c (new) 2c. Calls for the enhancement of a marine NATURA 2000 network, and a coherent and representative network of Marine Protected Areas under the Marine Strategy Framework Directive by 2020;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 c (new) 2c. Encourages all macro regional strategies to apply green public procurement in order to boost eco- innovation, development of new business models and use of secondary raw material;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 c (new) 2c. Stresses the importance of stakeholder dialogue and public communication of the macro-regional strategies to make them known and gain acceptance in the local communities; considers this a key element to lead the macro-regional strategies to success;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Highlights the need
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Highlights the need to mobilise funds for particular environmental goals of the macro-regions, complementing the existing funding;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Notes that macro regional strategies are being consistently integrated into policy planning at EU level, but more sporadically at national and regional level;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Stresses the importance of developing monitoring and evaluation tools for various indicators in order to better measure the achievement of environmental targets without creating unnecessary administrative burden for project partners and stakeholder;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls on the stakeholders of the macro-regions to use European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds) and other Union funding to promote environment-related investments that have climate change mitigation among their objectives;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 b (new) 4b. Calls for specific synchronisation and better coordinated use of existing funds at all levels to pursue macro- regional objectives in order optimally to unlock the potential of macro-regional strategies and ultimately fulfil the general expectations to the maximum;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 c (new) 4c. Calls on stakeholders in the macro-regions, in addition to the funds relevant to macro-regional strategies and the instruments for the financing of particular environmental objectives, also to consider using the European Fund for Strategic Investments;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Points out that the sea of the Adriatic and Ionian region is threatened by various sources of pollution, including untreated waste, marine litter, untreated effluent and eutrophication from agricultural runoff and fish farms; calls therefore on the participating countries to further step up their efforts in tackling these environmental challenges, stresses the importance of introducing for this purpose a proper system for the treatment of waste and effluent and the protection of water supplies;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Points out that the sea of the Adriatic and Ionian region is threatened by various sources of pollution, including untreated waste, marine litter and eutrophication from agricultural runoff and fish farms; points out that many bays and inlets up along the west coast of Ireland are likewise suffering from fish farm pollution; calls therefore on the participating countries to further step up their efforts in tackling these environmental challenges;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Points out that the Adriatic Sea, due to its semi-enclosed nature, is especially vulnerable to pollution and has unusual hydrographic features; its depth and the length of its coastline vary considerably between the north and south of the region;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Believes that completion of road and transport infrastructures and measures to realise the immense untapped potential of renewable energy sources are essential conditions for achievement of environmental sustainability goals in the macro-region
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Points to the need to ensure environmental sustainability in the Adriatic and Ionian macro-region by means of specific environmental protection measures, including projects for the launching of surveys and the prevention of subsidence;
Amendment 3 #
1a. Welcomes the potential for macro- regional strategies to foster coordinated action, deepen dialogue between different actors and to improve effectiveness of Union financial instruments in the areas of environmental and biodiversity protection, climate mitigation and adaptation;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Welcomes the fact that all four pillars of the Adriatic and Ionian region – Blue Growth, Connecting the Region, Environmental Quality and Sustainable Tourism – are designed to contribute to sustainability goals;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. recalls the previous position of the EP on the INI report on "The evolution of EU macro-regional strategies: present practice and future prospects, especially in the Mediterranean”; points out that the Mediterranean is a coherent whole, constituting a single cultural and environmental area, and sharing very many characteristics and priorities common to the 'Mediterranean climate’: the same crops, abundant renewable energy sources, particularly solar energy, the importance of tourism, the same natural disaster risks (fires, floods, earthquakes, water shortages) and the risks from human activity, particularly maritime pollution; reaffirms once again its support to the implementation of a macro-regional strategy for the Mediterranean basin, so as to offer an action plan for addressing the common and problematic challenges facing the Mediterranean countries and regions and to give structure to this key area for Europe's development and integration, and calls on the Council and the Commission to act quickly on this matter;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Calls on the Commission to ensure that third countries involved in projects in the macro-region comply with the relevant Union acquis, in order to guarantee the sustainable exploitation of the Union's resources; in particular the Marine Strategy Framework, the Water Framework, Urban Waste Water, Nitrates, Waste, Birds and Habitats Directives as well the Green Infrastructure Strategy; recommends that agreements and conventions be used to involve countries outside the EU in European Union environmental projects;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Considers the Sustainable Tourism pillar of the Adriatic and Ionian region as a positive instrument to create sustainable economic growth in the region as well as to raise awareness for environmental challenges and the macro-regional strategies;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 c (new) 5c. Points out that the rich biodiversity of the Adriatic-Ionian (Region), marine sub-region is a major draw for tourism, recreational and fishing activities, and contributes to the cultural heritage of the macro-region; therefore, considers the lack of habitat maps unfortunate; calls on the participant countries to undertake mapping actions within the framework of the EUSAIR;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 d (new) 5d. Emphasises that an ecosystem- based approach to the coordination of activities is needed within the framework of Integrated Coastal Management (ICM) and Marine Spatial Planning (MSP), in order to ensure the sustainable use of resources, as both frameworks are important stimulants for trans-boundary collaboration and stakeholder cooperation across different coastal and maritime sector activities, and have the potential to bring together ecosystem services and Blue Growth opportunities in a sustainable way;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 e (new) 5e. Calls for the establishment of a coordinated monitoring system and database on marine litter and marine pollution, including the identification of sources and types of litter and pollution, as well as a geographic information system (GIS) database on the location and sources of marine litter;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 f (new) 5f. Calls for the drafting and implementation of a joint contingency plan for oil spills and other large-scale pollution events, building on the work of the sub-regional contingency plan developed by the Joint Commission for the protection of the Adriatic Sea and coastal areas, and the Barcelona Convention protocols;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 g (new) 5g. Calls on the countries involved to give priority to capacity-building directed at the EUSAIR key implementers, as well as at programme authorities responsible for EUSAIR relevant operational programmes;
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Notes with appreciation the implementation of projects such as DANUBEPARKS 2.0, STURGEON 2020, SEERISK, CC-WARE and the Danube Air Nexus cluster in reaching the EUSDR environmental goals;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Recognises the importance of macro-regional strategies in providing a single integrated framework to address common challenges faced by a defined geographical area encompassing Member States and third countries, which benefit in this way from strengthened cooperation contributing to achievement of economic, social and territorial cohesion;
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Welcomes the Danube region project "EuroAccess" as a tool to make available funding more accessible and encourages other macro-regional regions to consider this as a best practice;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls on the Commission to commence the development of an Iberian Peninsula macro-region meeting the challenges of conducting a properly planned forestry policy in line with climatic requirements, in a bid to remedy rural depopulation, desertification and soil erosion through the proper ecological management and diversification of forests, planting native deciduous trees that are more fire-resistant, thereby helping to reverse the massive fire damage sustained by forests every year in Portugal and Spain.
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Welcomes the setting up of the Interreg Danube Transnational Programme as a tool for providing support to its governance, and highlights its direct contribution to the Strategy's implementation as being one of the most visible results of the EUSDR;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Stresses that a more integrated approach to mobility and multimodality in the Danube region would also be beneficial to the environment;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Stresses that the European Commission should rapidly initiate studies for the development of an Iberian macro-region in view of the major cross- border challenges arising in connection with climate change, environmental protection, risk prevention and management, the efficient use of resources, nature conservation, biodiversity, shared water resources and exploration of the potential of the blue economy and of renewables;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 c (new) 6c. Welcomes the setting up of the Danube Strategy Point as a new body for facilitating the implementation of the EUSDR, and encourages the involvement of all concerned parties and potentially interested actors;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 d (new) 6d. Notes with concern that, compared to the first years of its activity, the EUSDR now seems to have been given a lower priority slot in the political narrative at national level in those countries involved; emphasises the need to maintain the political momentum since the commitment by countries directly affects the availability of human resources in the national and regional administrations, and this is crucial for the smooth functioning of the strategy, and for working towards a consolidation of the progress made and results achieved so far;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 e (new) 6e. Calls on the participant countries to ensure an adequate participation of national representatives in EUSDR Steering Group meetings on priority areas, and to consider reducing the number and scope of current priority areas if sufficient resources are not allocated within well-defined timeframes;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 f (new) 6f. Highlight the issue of numerous sunken ships in the Danube that present a navigational and ecological danger, especially where water levels are low; points out that sunken wrecks contain appreciable amounts of fuel and other substances that pollute water constantly, while the rusting metal of the ships generates pollution on a continuous basis with serious repercussions; calls for the mobilisation of EU funds for tackling this problem and greater co-operation in the framework of the EUSDR;
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Calls on the Commission and participating countries and their regions to further integrate macro-regional strategies into EU sectorial policies, and to develop synergies between them, thereby facilitating the implementation of sectorial policies in an integrated way across territories;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls on the stakeholders of the Alpine macro-region to use European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds) and other Union funding to promote environment-related investments that have climate change mitigation and adaptation among their objectives;
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Calls on the stakeholders of the Alpine macro-region to use European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds) and other Union funding to promote environment-related investments that have climate change mitigation among their objectives; particularly welcomes the region's integrated approach to align the preservation of the environment and ecosystems with the pursuit of economic and social prosperity;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Underlines that environmental policy is of a cross-cutting nature and that the favoured options in Alpine strategy fields must reconcile environmental sustainability and economic development; whereas climate change mitigation and biodiversity preservation policies include the need to reinforce the resilience of ecosystems with enough habitat connectivity to allow species migration;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Points out that the Alpine region is an important regional transport hub and that consequently the coordinated development of transport infrastructure, also with regard to ensuring healthy and balanced ecosystems, is of utmost importance;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Stresses that the Alpine macro- region is one of the largest natural and recreation areas and one of the most attractive tourism regions in Europe, but, because of the particular geographical and natural conditions, access to it is a challenge; considers that, in order to preserve the Alps as a unique natural area, it is vital to create sustainable and interrelated transport strategies which can be jointly coordinated and developed in the context of the macro-regions;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Is concerned that climate change can give rise to hydrogeological instability and threaten biodiversity in the Alpine Region; underlines that rising temperatures are a serious threat to the survival of species' populations living at high altitudes, and that the melting of glaciers is a further cause for concern, as it has a major impact on groundwater reserves;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Stresses that the Alpine region's tourism and agricultural sector are key stakeholder for the regional sustainable development and therefore should be integrated at all stages of the implementation of environmental projects;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 c (new) 7c. Considers it essential to pursue climate change policies encompassing production and consumption patterns that are in line with the circular economy principles and shorter cycles in the food supply chain, and to place the emphasis on the rational use and reuse of local materials and natural resources, including wastewater and agricultural waste, and on the sharing of services encouraged by green public procurement, and fostering close links between producers and consumers at local level;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 d (new) 7d. Notes that the first steps in the implementation of the EUSALP strategy have shown that its integration into the existing programmes has proven difficult, as they are governed by structures, frameworks and timeframes which are often incompatible with the needs of a macro-regional strategy;
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 e (new) 7e. Calls on the participant countries to reinforce their commitment, continuity, stability, empowerment and support to the EUSALP Action Group members who will represent them, and to make sure that all Action Groups are adequately represented;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1b. Recognises the importance of the four existing EU macro-regional strategies, namely the 2009 EU Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region (EUSBSR), the 2011 EU Strategy for the Danube Region (EUSDR) the 2014 EU Strategy for the Adriatic and Ionian Region (EUSAIR) and the 2015 EU Strategy for the Alpine Region (EUSALP);
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Points out that the environmental state of the Baltic Sea has remained the main focus of the EUSBSR since its launch in 2009;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Recalls that the Baltic Sea is one of the most polluted seas in the world; stresses the importance of cooperation to improve the state of the Baltic Sea; calls for neighbourhood programmes to continue throughout the Baltic Sea catchment area and to include in them funding by means of which the state of the environment can be improved throughout the catchment area;
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 b (new) 8b. Notes that achieving a good environmental status by 2020 is one of the key objectives of policy actions in the Baltic Sea Region;
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 b (new) 8b. Considers it deplorable from the point of view of the marine macro-regions that ships can discharge untreated effluent into the sea if they are more than 12 nautical miles (approximately 22 km) from the coast and that treated effluent can even be discharged into the water three nautical miles (approximately 5.5 km) from the coast; calls for funding to be provided to increase the reception capacity for effluent at ports so that all passenger vessels can treat their effluent as required by the revised Annex IV to the MARPOL Convention;
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 c (new) 8c. Calls on all stakeholders to organise more frequent and regular political discussions on the EUSBSR at national level within the Parliament or Government, and also within the Council at the relevant Ministerial meetings;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 c (new) 8c. Welcomes, from the point of view of the Baltic macro-region, the Sulphur Directive adopted by the EU and the decision by the Marine Environment Protection Committee of the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) of 27 October 2016 to designate the Baltic Sea and the North Sea an NOxEmission Control Area (NECA);recalls that the unclean fuels used by vessels are still resulting in the emission of large quantities of nitrogen and sulphur into the air, from where it falls out into the sea;
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 d (new) 8d. Notes that the EUSBSR is a stable cooperation framework with more than 100 flagship initiatives and new networks; nevertheless, urges stakeholders to maintain its momentum and to improve policy coordination and content by building on project results;
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 d (new) 8d. Considers it important to review the permission for users of open-loop sulphur scrubbers to discharge sulphur- scrubbing water back into the sea; observes that effluent from closed-loop sulphur scrubbers has to be delivered for treatment, but that effluent from open- loop scrubbers is discharged directly back into the sea, creating a greenwash operational model, in which sulphur is removed from the air but ends up in the sea;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 c (new) 1c. Considers that the four strategies could be still more effectively administered in the context of sustainable development, climate change, renewables and blue economy;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 e (new) Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 f (new) 8f. Recalls that Blue Growth in marine macro-regions is based on sustainable use of the potential of the seas, which means that the environmental aspect must be taken into account in all activities; recalls that, within the framework of the Blue Bioeconomy, it is possible to find new products and services and to develop and cultivate know-how based on them in order to promote employment; stresses that sustainable use of natural resources and favourable status of aquatic and marine environments create a strong foundation for the Blue Bioeconomy;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 g (new) 8g. Stresses the significant shift towards the bioeconomy and the circular economy in economic thinking, modes of action and methods, which can help to tackle the environmental challenges in the Baltic; recalls the opportunities for exploiting renewable energy and improving energy efficiency in the Baltic region;
Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 8 h (new) 8h. Attaches importance to the possibility of connecting the Baltic region to energy networks in order to reduce and eliminate energy poverty and to increase energy security and security of supply;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Encourages the expansion of conservation areas to protect the environment and halt biodiversity loss, particularly through the enhancement of the Natura 2000 and Emerald networks, as well as the LIFE programme;
source: 607.956
2017/09/18
REGI
154 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas a macro-region can be defined as a
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas macro-regions are involved in the implementation of long- term, interconnected, useful and cross- cutting political issues;
Amendment 100 #
20. Stresses that the Alpine region is delineated by many borders and that the EUSALP can also provide the opportunity to strengthen transnational cross-border cooperation between regions and cities, to forge links and networks between people and to eliminate existing borders and barriers for workers and economic activities;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 6 a (new) Points out that the Alpine region is an area that is fragile with regard to its hydrogeological situation and has huge natural resources; stresses the importance, therefore, of new and swift coordinated measures to combat and adapt to climate change;
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 6 a (new) Stresses that the role of macro-regional strategies needs to be consolidated in the framework regulations for the post-2020 period;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 6 b (new) Takes the view that consideration could be given to new macro-regional strategies with added value, for example a macro- regional strategy for the Carpathian region, along the lines of the EU Strategy for the Alpine region;
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Points out that MRS bear fruit if they are rooted in a long-term political perspective and organised in such a way that all stakeholders are effectively represented from the outset; considers it necessary to strengthen the multi-level governance of MRS, which should be clear and transparent, with more effective coordination and communication mechanisms;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Points out that MRS bear fruit if they are rooted in a long-term political perspective and organised in such a way that all stakeholders are effectively represented from the outset; this requires the effective exchange of information, best practices, know-how and experience between macro-regions.
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Points out that MRS
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Points out that MRS bear fruit if they are rooted in a long-term political perspective and organised in such a way that all stakeholders including public institutions, academia, private sector and civil society, are effectively represented from the outset;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Believes that strategy implementation can only be successful if based on efficient coordination and cooperation structures, on shared long- term political commitment among the institutional levels concerned and is backed by adequate funding; highlights the need, in this respect, to seek synergies and complementarities of regional, national funding with EU funding instruments, which, in addition to enhancing the European Territorial Cooperation (ETC) programmes, should result in specific choices in the regional and national programming of the European Structural and Investment Funds;
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Believes that strategy implementation can only be successful if based on efficient coordination and cooperation structures and backed by adequate funding; highlights the need, in this respect, to seek synergies and complementarities of regional, national funding with EU funding instruments; recommends further building of the administrative capacity to ensure that political commitment translates into effective implementation;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) Da. whereas macro-regions act as ambassadors of the European Union in order to demonstrate that trust, dialogue, cross-border cooperation and solidarity work successfully, and are tangible, in the EU;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Believes that strategy implementation can only be successful if based on efficient coordination and cooperation structures and backed by adequate funding; highlights the need, in this respect, to seek synergies and complementarities of regional, national funding with EU funding instruments and to align the national and regional operational programmes of the countries involved in the strategies' objectives;
Amendment 111 #
22. Believes that strategy implementation can only be successful if based on efficient coordination and cooperation structures and backed by adequate funding; highlights the need, in this respect, to seek synergies and complementarities of regional, national funding with EU funding instruments, also by promoting cross-border projects within the EFSI and through direct funding;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Believes that strategy implementation can only be successful if based on efficient coordination and cooperation structures and backed by adequate funding; highlights the need, in this respect, to
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Believes that strategy implementation can only be successful if based on efficient coordination and cooperation structures and backed by adequate funding; highlights the need, in this respect, to seek synergies and complementarities of regional, national funding with existing EU funding instruments, including the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI);
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Believes that strategy implementation can only be successful if based on efficient coordination and cooperation structures, including specific multi-level governance, and backed by adequate funding; highlights the need, in this respect, to seek synergies and complementarities of regional, national funding with EU funding instruments;
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. Encourages Member States to strongly embed the MRS objectives in their operational programmes; encourages stronger cross-border cooperation to attain accumulation of projects through smart synergies, thus better contributing to achieving the Strategy's goals and attracting private investments;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. Stresses the need to coordinate the financial resources available at the various levels; considers it necessary both to boost efforts to involve the private sector and to use other financial instruments to finance projects as part of MRS;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 b (new) 22b. Believes that the simplification of the funds and structures behind the macro-regional strategies would increase their effectiveness;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Proposes that the participating countries make clear commitments in terms of funding from the outset; encourages all macro regional strategies to apply green public procurement in order to boost eco- innovation, development of new business models and use of secondary raw material;
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas MRS are based on the ‘three no’s’ principle of no new funding, no new structures and no new legislation for now within the existing EU political framework;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Proposes that the participating countries make clear commitments in terms of funding from the outset; calls on the Commission to promote good practice or to develop incentives to encourage the active participation of all parties concerned;
Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Proposes that the participating countries make clear commitments in terms of funding and human resources from the outset;
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Proposes that the participating countries make clear commitments in terms of funding for implementation from the outset;
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) 23a. Points out the importance that beside the local, regional and national authority representatives, the MRS governing boards should also include private sector and civil society representatives in order to improve their effectiveness, while assuring gender balance;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) 23a. Stresses the importance of a level of governance that is consistent with the MRS objectives; calls on the Commission to promote the spread of good practice and to develop mechanisms that can make it easier to achieve results more effectively;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Stresses that greater result- orientation is required
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Stresses that greater result- orientation is required in order to justify the investment of resources, which should, for its part, be commensurate with the objectives set, which must relate to the true needs of the territories concerned;
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Stresses that greater
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 – point 1 (new) (1) Stresses the need for greater involvement in the decision-making process of both stakeholders and local communities, with the aim of ensuring that their specific priorities are adhered to as much as possible, especially those relating to the environment and health;
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls for any questions about the MRS, such as on ownership and the necessary political incentives, as well as the stronger and higher-quality involvement of all levels of government in implementation, to be addressed in an appropriate manner;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F F. whereas pre-existing cooperation mechanisms at EU level and between Member States facilitate the implementation
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls for any questions about the MRS, such as on ownership and the necessary political incentives, to be addressed in a
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Is of the opinion that the visibility of
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Is of the opinion that the visibility
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Is of the opinion that the visibility of the results achieved and awareness about the activities of the macro-regions need to be enhanced;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 a (new) 26a. Underlines that in order to improve governance, MRS require the support of the European Commission, which should actively encourage national coordination and should work to strengthen the link between EU policies and the implementation of MRS, paying particular attention to the regional and local perspective. Considers that the EC should improve coordination across different directorate-generals and address existing overlaps at the level of EU;
Amendment 135 #
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Emphasises that the
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Encourages the Commission and participating countries to create better synergies and cooperation of their programmes and projects under respective macroregional strategies with other national and cross-border programmes and projects of neighbouring regions in order to enhance the positive outcome of their implementation and efficiency of the resources invested;
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Highlights the need to use regional smart specialisation strategies (S3) to guide MRS towards industrial policy priorities, with a view to promoting collaboration between regions with complementary specialisations;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Urges all macro regional strategies to implement circular economy with the aim to achieve highest levels of environmental protection, health protection and non-toxic material cycles.
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Recital F a (new) Fa. whereas MRS became integral part of the EU policy framework so they can reinforce synergies between different EU policies and instruments and are anchored in the cohesion policy framework;
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Calls on the Commission to submit, as part of its next revision of cohesion policy rules, proposals to promote a better implementation of MRS;
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 b (new) 27b. Calls for a greater climate related spending with respect to the Paris Agreement objectives and reiterates commitment of the EU to the implementation of the SDGs
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 – point a a (new) (aa) effectiveness of the EU funding instruments which can provide assistance;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 – point b (b) indicators which could be integrated in each MRS in order to allow better result-orientation
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 – point b a (new) (ba) indicators which could be integrated in individual EU policies in the future, in order to allow better assessment of their territorial impact;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 – point c Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 – point d (d) simplification of the implementation and mainstreaming of funding schemes, in particular the alignment of EU and national funding;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 – point d a (new) (da) the issue of the quality of the involvement of regional and local government in the implementation;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Stresses that
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Stresses that, in order to be able to tackle new upcoming challenges in a given geographic area, it is important to carefully examine initiatives aimed at creating new macro-regional strategies; in this context reminds the engagement into Carpathian Region's issues from the top-down by local authorities, local self-governments, inhabitants along with intensive initiatives undertaken from the bottom up by non- governmental organizations, experts and the scientific world; therefore, confirms the need for the mobilization and concentration of the European Union's activities in the region; stresses that numerous institutional and civic projects implemented in the field of academic, youth, business as well as media cooperation reflect the necessity of raising the status of Carpathian Region in the European hierarchy of cooperation and development;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas the Commission adopts a single report on the implementation of all four existing EU macro-regional strategies every two years, with the next report due by the end of 2018;
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Stresses that, in order to be able to tackle new upcoming challenges in a given geographic area, it is important to carefully
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 a (new) 29a. Stresses that a Carpathian macro- regional strategy, similar to the strategy for the Alpine region, could help to preserve traditional economic activities, encourage innovation and the development of new initiatives, contribute to the development of tourism in the wider region, including through thematic tourist routes and itineraries (food and wine tourism, sports tourism, etc.), as well as helping to support non-EU countries with a view to strengthening ties with the EU and mitigating possible negative effects on the EU’s external borders;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 a (new) 29a. Recalls that the Carpathians - Europe's second largest mountain range, with the highest mountain population - comprises some of the poorest areas of the EU, which have immediate need of infrastructure, transport and environmental investment and support for local entrepreneurship, which could be ensured by a separate European strategy;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 a (new) 29a. It is necessary to consider the sustainability of the existing 'three no's' principle with regard to the quality of implementation, and to consider new solutions that would include the minimum funds and structures needed to improve the implementation and achievement of results;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 a (new) 29a. Calls on the Commission and participating countries in MRS to communicate the results achieved by the strategies as broadly as possible in order to increase visibility of the strategies, in particular for the general public;
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G G. whereas the Commission adopts a single report on the success of the implementation of all existing EU macro- regional strategies every two years, with the next report due by the end of 2018;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. The relevance of the MRS has been underlined by the globalisation process, which has rendered individual countries interdependent and necessitates solutions to the cross-border problems involved with special regard to climate change effects;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. The relevance of the MRS has been underlined by the globalisation process, which has rendered individual countries interdependent and necessitates solutions to the cross-border problems involved, better coordination and joint planning;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Points out that MRS have been established in areas that are already particularly interdependent, and represent the natural evolution of the long-term work done by the EU on cross-border cooperation;
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Recognises that – to a varying degree – elements on which the quality of implementation depends, such as commitment, ownership, resources and governance, remain difficult to overcome in achieving the pre-determined goals;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Recognises that – to a varying degree – elements such as commitment, ownership, resources and governance remain difficult to overcome in achieving the pre-determined goals and calls on the Commission to explore mechanisms which can encourage the active participation of all stakeholders;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that MRS continue to make an invaluable contribution to cross-border, cross-sector and multi-level cooperation in Europe with a view to boosting connectivity in order to consolidate economic ties and knowledge transfer between regions with a similar potential for development;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that MRS continue to make an invaluable and innovative contribution to cross-border, cross-sector and multi- level cooperation
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses the positive impact of environmental risk management projects at regional and particularly cross-border level, along with projects focusing on the conservation of biodiversity, landscapes and air, water and soil quality;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Stresses that MRS continue to make an invaluable contribution to cross- border, cross-sector and multi-level cooperation in Europe;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Is of the opinion that multi-level governance
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Is of the opinion that multi-level governance should be embedded in all macro-regional strategy from its inception; encourages the Member States and regions involved to develop appropriate governance structures and working arrangement to facilitate cooperation including joint planning, alignment of funding opportunities and bottom-up approach;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas macro-regional strategies (MRS) are significant, as they are able to mobilise institutional actors, private sector and civil society towards EU policy goals;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Is of the opinion that multi-level governance , with a simultaneous strengthening of the role of the regions in it, should be embedded in all macro- regional strategy from its inception;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Encourages improved coordination and better partnerships between the different
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Encourages improved coordination and better partnerships between the different actors and policies at national
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Encourages improved coordination and better partnerships between the different actors and policies at national
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Encourages improved coordination and better partnerships, both vertical and horizontal, between the different actors and policies at national and regional level in order to facilitate the implementation of the MRS;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Notes that access to EU funds for MRS projects is more difficult, as process of agreeing for joint action at multi-level and multi country/region is demanding and time consuming. Stresses that as a consequence the MRS projects are less competitive than national projects;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Stresses the need to improve coordination and convergence between the different components of territorial cooperation in macroregional strategy spaces in order to reinforce the positive externalities of the projects being financed;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 Amendment 39 #
6. Emphasises the importance of developing administrative capacity in order to ensure the effective implementation of the strategies; highlights, in this regard, the creation of the structural reform support programme (SRSP), which can provide assistance in capacity building and effective implementation on the request of a Member State;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas macro-regional strategies (MRS) are significant, as they are able to mobilise institutional actors and civil society, and integrate existing resources, towards EU policy goals;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Emphasises the importance of developing administrative capacity in order to ensure the effective implementation of the strategies and calls on the Commission to actively promote the dissemination and application of good administrative practice;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Emphasises the importance of developing administrative capacity in the competent state authorities in order to ensure the effective implementation of
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Underlines the fact that MRS must be flexible enough to be adjusted and respond to unforeseen events which may affect the regions involved and the EU in general;
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Underlines the fact that MRS must be flexible enough to be adjusted and respond to unforeseen events which may affect the regions involved and the EU in general; highlights the necessity of the Commission’s coordinating role in this regard and, should it be required, also with a view to redefining the specific objectives of each strategy;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Underlines the fact that MRS must be flexible enough to be adjusted and respond to unforeseen events which may affect the regions involved and the EU in general; insists that the implementation of MRS should take account of specific local conditions; highlights the necessity of the Commission’s coordinating role in this regard;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Underlines the fact that MRS must be flexible enough to be adjusted and respond to unforeseen events which may affect the regions involved, the Member States and the EU in general; highlights the necessity of the Commission’s coordinating role in this regard;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 – subparagraph 1 (new) Considers it important that the medium- term objectives should have the possibility of rapid adaptation in the event of emergencies or crises such as the migratory/refugee crisis in order to respond effectively to the needs of local and regional actors;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 – point 1 (new) (1) Stresses the need for a territorial approach with regard to cooperation activities, pooling the resources of each macro-region on a case-by-case basis;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Stresses the important roles played by the experiences drawn from previous successful macro-regional strategies in ensuring the effective implementation of all macro-regional strategies.
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Specially stresses the importance of aligning the MRS objectives with the Paris Agreement in order to strengthen the ability of the Member States to adapt with the climate change impacts;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas macro-regional strategies (MRS) are significant, as they are able to mobilise public institutional actors and civil society towards common EU policy goals;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Stresses the importance of aligning the MRS with the Europe 2020 strategy objectives, Energy Union priorities, Circular Economy Package and other EU level flagship initiatives;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Welcomes the results achieved since the launch of the strategy in 2009, particularly with regard to the cooperation mechanisms not only between but also
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Highlights the experience of the Baltic Sea region which shows that long- term strategic thinking must remain the basis for macro-regional cooperation;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Highlights the positive impact the strategy has had on cooperation between the participating countries, by improving mobility and interconnections for all modes of transport, promoting culture and tourism and, in particular, promoting direct contacts between people;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Highlights the positive impact the strategy has had on cooperation between the participating countries and regions;
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Highlights the extremely valuable initial implementation support offered by the EP through pilot projects and preparatory actions which ensures efficient, user friendly and non- bureaucratic governance support in the most sensitive period of implementation of the Strategies;
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 b (new) 11b. Regrets the untimely closure of the Danube Strategy Point in Brussels which will delay the smooth transition to new implementation support arrangements;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Considers the Danube Financing Dialogue as a clear positive example of a way to overcome difficulties in financing the obstacles which projects of transnational relevance often face; draws attention to the major differences in development among regions in the Danube basin and stresses the need to channel investments to reduce those differences;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Considers the Danube Financing Dialogue as a clear positive example of a way to overcome difficulties in financing the obstacles which projects of transnational and cross-border relevance often face;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas MRS provide a platform for cooperation at regional and cross- border level between EU Member States and among third countries for the purposes of addressing common challenges, and fostering cooperation between and improving the integration of different partners and different policy sectors;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 b (new) 12b. Draws attention to the management of environmental risks, bearing in mind that regions downstream along the river are far more environmentally vulnerable and far more exposed to the accumulation of waste from further upstream, and proposes financing an action plan with the aim of mobilising citizens to keep the Danube area clean; highlights, in this context, the Keep Danube Clean initiative that aims to raise public awareness of environmental risks and stresses the need to step up actions aimed at reducing those risks;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Highlights the positive impact of cooperation between all interested parties within a new format for cross-border cooperation, which will generate a transfer of expertise and skill between local and regional authorities;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Stresses the prime importance of investment aimed at consolidating mobility and intermodality, and eliminating missing links;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Stresses that it is essential to maintain a high degree of political support
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Stresses that it is essential to maintain a high degree of political support and increase resources and capacity of competent state authorities in order to tackle the remaining challenges and improve implementation;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Given the natural interlink between the Danube river and the Black sea, invites the participating countries to enhance coordination between the EUSDR and the Black Sea Cross Border Cooperation and to work closely for overcoming shared socio-economic, environmental and transport challenges;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Stresses the utmost importance of nature and biodiversity preservation of the Danube River, with special attention to the protected areas endangered by increasing number of unsustainable connectivity projects
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Welcomes the process of design of the strategic projects, as it significantly contributes to the visibility of the EUSDR;
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 a (new) 13a. Stresses the importance of the strategy in the process of integration of the non-Member States;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Highlights the distinct nature of the EUSAIR on account of the number of potential and candidate participating countries, and considers that this format of cooperation can be a great opportunity for the entire region; takes the view that EUSAIR should be the catalyst for the continuation and revitalisation of the European Union enlargement process;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas MRS provide a platform for cooperation between EU Member States and
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Highlights the distinct nature of the EUSAIR on account of the number of potential and candidate participating countries, and considers that this format of cooperation can be a great opportunity for the entire region, in particular as regards the European integration process;
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 – subparagraph 1 (new) Additional support is needed to deepen cooperation between regions from non- EU, accession countries so that joint programmes respond to common problems, shortcomings and challenges;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Notes with concern the lack of substantial support from the Facility Point which was created for this very purpose;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Notes with concern the persistent problems of resources, governance and ownership, which are preventing concrete results and the strategy’s objectives from being fully achieved; stresses the need to strengthen administrative support for the development and financing of projects, to better coordinate the relevant existing sources of financing, and to allocate additional funds – in particular from the European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI) and the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) – with a view to completing strategic projects for the development of transport and energy infrastructure in order to strengthen connectivity;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Notes with concern the persistent problems of resources, governance and ownership, which are preventing the strategy’s objectives from being fully achieved, and calls on the involved countries to bolster and provide greater support to the competent authorities in implementing the strategy, where such a need exists;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Notes with concern the persistent problems
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Notes with concern the persistent problems of resources, governance and ownership, which are preventing the strategy’s objectives from being fully achieved; calls for a range of measures to improve the administrative capacity of the MRS;
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 a (new) 15a. Invites the EC to facilitate overcoming the implementation problems also in respect to different arrangements within non EU countries; welcomes the efforts made to promote cooperation between the ESIF and the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA) which should contribute to the achievement of EUSAIR objectives;
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Stresses that the region has been at the forefront of the migration crisis in the recent years; considers that the EUSAIR could help a
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas MRS provide a platform for cooperation between EU Member States
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Stresses that the region has been at the forefront of the migration crisis in the recent years; considers that the EUSAIR
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Stresses that the region has been at the forefront of the migration crisis in the recent years; considers that the EUSAIR could help alleviate such challenges; invites EC to look into the possibilities of facilitating access to financial resources for migration related joint activities within the region;
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 – subparagraph 1 (new) This macro-region is of particular importance for sectors such as transport, as most of it consists of maritime routes, sustainable tourism and blue growth, both in coastal continental areas and in the islands. This entails strengthening small and medium-sized enterprises, creating new jobs, exploiting fish stocks with respect for biodiversity and strengthening research and innovation for fish farms.
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 – point 1 (new) (1) Calls in particular for the macro- region to promote an integrated approach towards migration which provides for a radical change in asylum policy from the point of view of solidarity between Member States and a careful analysis of the overall strategy on cooperation with third countries;
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 – point 2 (new) (2) Stresses the need - given the close link between this macro-region and coastal activities - to defend the blue economy as one of the solutions to the economic crisis because, if adequately supported by specific training, it promotes the creation of new jobs and, in particular, employment for women and young people in coastal and island countries;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 – point 3 (new) (3) Stresses the need, given the serious deficiencies in the infrastructure networks in that macro-region, to develop sustainable intermodality with the aim also of achieving greater social cohesion among the Member States participating in the strategy;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 – subparagraph 1 (new) Calls for greater recognition of the high potential of the renewable energy sources which concern the macro-region and which are currently broadly underused;
Amendment 87 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. Points out that the climate change had a serious effect on the region, thus cooperation in the field of renewable energy sector and environment protection needs to be strengthened with the EUSAIR providing a solid platform;
Amendment 88 #
16a. Highlights the strategy's enormous potential to stimulate development and better integration in the region's transport and energy infrastructure;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 b (new) 16b. Highlights the issue of marine litter in the Adriatic and Ionian Sea as an obstacle for achieving the blue growth and developing sustainable and green tourism sectors in the region that can play a crucial role in creating jobs and boosting the local economy;
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C a (new) Ca. whereas macro-regional strategies are geared to addressing territorial challenges that can be solved more effectively across national borders (connectivity, biodiversity, environmental protection, blue growth, competitiveness of mountain areas, etc.);
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 c (new) 16c. Recommends close cooperation and coordination of the inland, the coastal area and the islands to achieve synergies between clean energy projects and healthy food production
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Considers the EUSALP as proof that the macro-regional concept can also be applied advantageously to more developed regions of the Member States;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Considers the EUSALP as proof that the macro-regional concept can also be applied successfully to more developed regions;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Stresses that the EUSALP can be a good example of a template strategy for territorial cohesion, as it incorporates different specific areas, productive areas, mountains and rural areas and some of the
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Stresses that the EUSALP can be a good example of a template strategy for territorial cohesion, as it simultaneously incorporates different specific areas, productive areas, mountains and rural areas and some of the most important and developed cities in the EU;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Stresses that the EUSALP offers seven countries, 48 regions and 80 million people a platform for jointly addressing the challenges they face (climate change, demographic changes, migration, global competition, energy supply, transport and mobility, and the digital divide);
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Stresses that participating states and regions should identify new solutions for a more effective use of the Structural Funds and of direct EU funding, in addition to the EFSI, to support coordinated plans and address common priorities;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Stresses that the
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Stresses that the Alpine region is delineated by many borders and that the EUSALP can also provide the opportunity to strengthen cross-border cooperation, to forge links and networks between people and to eliminate existing borders and barriers for workers and economic activities; stresses the importance of the challenges facing the Alpine region, in particular in terms of interconnections in transport and digital coverage, innovation and adjustment to climate change;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Stresses that the Alpine region is delineated by many borders and that removing those barriers is a prerequisite for cooperation to work; points out that the EUSALP can
source: 610.660
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
2017-09-27Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| procedure/subject/0 |
Old
4.70.05 Regional cooperation, transfrontier cooperationNew
4.70.05 Regional cooperation, cross-border cooperation |
2017-09-07Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/commission/0 |
|
| other/0 |
|
2017-06-22Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/committees/1/shadows/2 |
|
| committees/1/shadows/2 |
|
2017-06-17Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/3 |
|
2017-05-25Show (2) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/committees/1/shadows/4 |
|
| committees/1/shadows/4 |
|
2017-04-27Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/2 |
|
2017-04-20Show (1) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/0/docs/0/text |
|
2017-04-14Show (6) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1/committees/1/date |
2017-02-06T00:00:00
|
| activities/1/committees/1/rapporteur |
|
| activities/1/committees/1/shadows |
|
| committees/1/date |
2017-02-06T00:00:00
|
| committees/1/rapporteur |
|
| committees/1/shadows |
|
2017-03-21Show (3) Changes | Timetravel
| activities/1 |
|
| procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
REGI/8/09434
|
| procedure/stage_reached |
Old
Preparatory phase in ParliamentNew
Awaiting committee decision |
2017-03-18Show (5) Changes
| activities |
|
| committees |
|
| links |
|
| other |
|
| procedure |
|