BETA


2017/2279(INI) Strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion in the European Union: 7th report of the European Commission

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead REGI JOULAUD Marc (icon: PPE PPE) BRESSO Mercedes (icon: S&D S&D), TOMAŠIĆ Ruža (icon: ECR ECR), VAN MILTENBURG Matthijs (icon: ALDE ALDE), MICHELS Martina (icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL), D'AMATO Rosa (icon: EFDD EFDD)
Committee Opinion BUDG OMARJEE Younous (icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL) Bernd KÖLMEL (icon: ECR ECR), Ivana MALETIĆ (icon: PPE PPE), Sophie MONTEL (icon: ENF ENF), Stanisław ŻÓŁTEK (icon: ENF ENF)
Committee Opinion EMPL ULVSKOG Marita (icon: S&D S&D) Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO (icon: S&D S&D), Jasenko SELIMOVIC (icon: ALDE ALDE), Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ (icon: ECR ECR)
Committee Opinion CULT DIACONU Mircea (icon: ALDE ALDE) Silvia COSTA (icon: S&D S&D), Liadh NÍ RIADA (icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL), Bogdan Brunon WENTA (icon: PPE PPE)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54

Events

2018/08/30
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2018/04/17
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2018/04/17
   EP - Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 506 votes to 71, with 45 abstentions, a resolution on strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion in the European Union: the 7th report of the European Commission.

The 7th Cohesion Report shows that regional disparities are narrowing again, but that the picture is highly uneven , whether measured by GDP per head, employment or other indicators, and that certain disparities persist, or are shifting or growing, between and within regions and Member States, including inside the euro area. It also contains worrying information about unemployment rates, including youth unemployment rates, which in many regions have not reverted to the levels seen before the crisis, and about competitiveness, poverty and social inclusion.

Added value of cohesion policy : Parliament stressed that cohesion policy provides European added value by contributing to European public goods and priorities (such as growth, social inclusion, innovation and environmental protection), as well as to public and private investment, and that it is a fundamental tool for achieving the Treaty objective of combating disparities with a view to the upward adaptation of living standards and reducing the backwardness of the least favoured regions. European added value is strongly reflected in European territorial cooperation (ETC).

Members considered it crucial that cohesion policy in the new programming period should continue to adequately cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main public investment instrument based on long-term strategy and perspectives.

A concentration of cohesion policy exclusively on the least developed regions would hinder progress on the political priorities of the Union as a whole. They reiterated their commitment to shared management and the partnership principle, which should be preserved and strengthened for the post-2020 period, as well as to multi-level governance.

Territorial dimension : Parliament stressed the importance of supporting rural territories by encouraging investment in projects that support the local economy and accompany these regions in the difficulties they face, such as rural desertification, social inclusion, lack of professional opportunities, the destruction of town centres or areas without healthcare. It called for certain territorial characteristics, such as those of island, mountain, rural, border, northern, coastal or peripheral regions, to be better taken into account when defining investment priorities.

The introduction of integrated strategies for sustainable urban development would also merit further development and replication in other sub-regional territories.

The ‘middle-income regions’ : Members noted that the ‘middle-income regions’ have not grown at the same rate as either the low-income regions (which still need to catch up with the rest of the EU) and the regions with very high income, as they face the challenge referred to as the ‘middle-income trap’, because of their excessively high costs in comparison with the former and excessively weak innovation systems in comparison with the latter.

Members are convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to the middle-income regions.

Fields of action : Parliament stressed that employment (including youth unemployment), social inclusion, fighting poverty, supporting innovation, digitalisation, support for SMEs and start-ups, climate change, the circular economy and infrastructure should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future . It also noted that a specific post-2020 financing mechanism must be created under Article 349 TFEU to integrate migrants in the outermost regions, which have to cope with greater migratory pressure owing to their specific characteristics, and thus contribute to their sustainable development.

A simplified cohesion policy : Parliament stressed the need to provide a framework which guarantees legal stability through simple, clear and predictable rules , particularly as regards management and auditing, in order to ensure a proper balance between performance and simplification objectives. It suggested a simplified procedure for the targeted modification of operational programmes during programming (e.g. in the case of natural disasters).

Challenges and prospects : Members are extremely concerned at the scenarios recently presented by the Commission, concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude many regions from the scope of cohesion policy. They wish to see an ambitious budget commensurate with the challenges facing the regions. They considered that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection. However, Parliament stressed that cohesion policy cannot be the solution to all crises, and opposes the use of cohesion policy funds to cover short-term financing needs outside the policy’s scope. It also called for every effort to be made to avoid delays in programming for the next period in order to prevent late payments .

Some European regions are particularly exposed to the impact of Brexit. Parliament stressed that the future cohesion policy must minimise the negative impact of Brexit on other European regions, and called for detailed consideration to be given to the possibility of continuing partnerships in the context of territorial cooperation.

Documents
2018/04/17
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2018/04/16
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2018/04/06
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
Details

The Committee on Regional Development adopted the own-initiative report by Marc JOULAUD (EPP, FR) on strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion in the European Union: the 7th report of the European Commission.

The 7th Cohesion Report shows that regional disparities are narrowing again, but that the picture is highly uneven, whether measured by GDP per head, employment or other indicators, and that certain disparities persist, or are shifting or growing, between and within regions and Member States, including inside the euro area. It also contains worrying information about unemployment rates, including youth unemployment rates, which in many regions have not reverted to the levels seen before the crisis, and about competitiveness, poverty and social inclusion.

The added value of cohesion policy : Members considered it crucial that cohesion policy in the new programming period should continue to adequately cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main public investment instrument based on long-term strategy and perspectives, with a budget commensurate with existing and new challenges, and ensuring the fulfilment of the basic goals of the policy. Cohesion policy provides European added value by contributing to European public goods and priorities (such as growth, social inclusion, innovation and environmental protection), as well as to public and private investment, and that it is a fundamental tool for achieving the Treaty objective of combating disparities with a view to the upward adaptation of living standards and reducing the backwardness of the least favoured regions.

Members stressed that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take into account national development needs along with the needs and specificities of different regions and territories, and to bring the Union closer to its citizens.

The ‘middle-income regions’ : the report noted that the ‘middle-income regions’ have not grown at the same rate as either the low-income regions (which still need to catch up with the rest of the EU) and the regions with very high income, as they face the challenge referred to as the ‘middle-income trap’, because of their excessively high costs in comparison with the former and excessively weak innovation systems in comparison with the latter. Members are convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to the middle-income regions.

Fields of action : Member stressed that employment (including youth unemployment), social inclusion, fighting poverty, supporting innovation, digitalisation, support for SMEs and start-ups, climate change, the circular economy and infrastructure should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future . They also noted that a specific post-2020 financing mechanism must be created under Article 349 TFEU to integrate migrants in the outermost regions, which have to cope with greater migratory pressure owing to their specific characteristics, and thus contribute to their sustainable development.

A simplified cohesion policy : the Commission is called on to take account of the recommendations of the High Level Group on Simplification in its future legislative proposals. Members stressed the need to provide a framework which guarantees legal stability through simple, clear and predictable rules, particularly as regards management and auditing, in order to ensure a proper balance between performance and simplification objectives. Members called for a reduction in the volume of legislation and guidelines.

Challenges and prospects : Members are extremely concerned at the scenarios recently presented by the Commission, concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude many regions from the scope of cohesion policy. They wish to see an ambitious budget commensurate with the challenges facing the regions. They considered that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection. However, the report stressed that cohesion policy cannot be the solution to all crises, and opposes the use of cohesion policy funds to cover short-term financing needs outside the policy’s scope.

Lastly, Members noted that some European regions are particularly exposed to the impact of Brexit . They stressed that the future cohesion policy must minimise the negative impact of Brexit on other European regions, and called for detailed consideration to be given to the possibility of continuing partnerships in the context of territorial cooperation.

Documents
2018/03/27
   EP - Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
2018/03/22
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2018/03/21
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2018/03/20
   EP - Committee opinion
Documents
2018/02/28
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2018/01/31
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2018/01/18
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
2018/01/11
   EP - ULVSKOG Marita (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in EMPL
2018/01/10
   EP - OMARJEE Younous (GUE/NGL) appointed as rapporteur in BUDG
2017/12/05
   EP - DIACONU Mircea (ALDE) appointed as rapporteur in CULT
2017/10/10
   EP - JOULAUD Marc (PPE) appointed as rapporteur in REGI
2017/10/09
   EC - Document attached to the procedure

Documents

Votes

A8-0138/2018 - Marc Joulaud - am 1 17/04/2018 13:49:56.000

2018/04/17 Outcome: -: 566, +: 81, 0: 13
?? LU CY SI EE MT IE LV DK LT AT SK FI HU HR EL BE SE CZ NL BG FR PT RO GB PL ES IT DE
Total
1
4
5
8
5
5
9
6
11
10
18
11
13
19
11
18
20
19
18
23
17
56
20
29
60
47
50
58
87
icon: ENF ENF
28

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

3

United Kingdom ENF

For (1)

1
2

Italy ENF

2

Germany ENF

For (1)

1
icon: NI NI
19

NI

Against (1)

1

Denmark NI

1

Hungary NI

Abstain (1)

3

France NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

United Kingdom NI

For (1)

Against (2)

3

Germany NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2
icon: EFDD EFDD
37

Lithuania EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2

Czechia EFDD

For (1)

1

France EFDD

Abstain (1)

3

Poland EFDD

1

Germany EFDD

Abstain (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
54

Luxembourg ALDE

For (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

3

Ireland ALDE

Against (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

3

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Sweden ALDE

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Portugal ALDE

1

Romania ALDE

2

United Kingdom ALDE

Against (1)

1

Germany ALDE

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
45

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2
4

Denmark GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Czechia GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

3

France GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Italy GUE/NGL

3
icon: ECR ECR
54

Cyprus ECR

Against (1)

1

Lithuania ECR

Against (1)

1

Slovakia ECR

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Finland ECR

2

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1
3

Czechia ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Romania ECR

2

Italy ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
50

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Hungary Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

6

Italy Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
171

Cyprus S&D

1

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

3

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

Against (1)

1

Denmark S&D

Against (1)

1

Lithuania S&D

2

Finland S&D

2

Hungary S&D

For (1)

3

Croatia S&D

2

Czechia S&D

3

Netherlands S&D

Against (2)

2
icon: PPE PPE
200

Luxembourg PPE

Against (2)

2

Cyprus PPE

Against (1)

1

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Malta PPE

2

Ireland PPE

Against (2)

Abstain (1)

3

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania PPE

2

United Kingdom PPE

2

A8-0138/2018 - Marc Joulaud - résolution de la commission REGI 17/04/2018 13:50:21.000

2018/04/17 Outcome: +: 506, -: 71, 0: 45
DE ES PL IT RO FR PT CZ GB BG BE FI LT NL AT HR EL IE SK LV SI CY HU LU MT EE SE DK ??
Total
80
42
45
55
29
53
19
19
56
14
18
13
10
24
17
9
17
8
10
7
8
6
17
5
5
4
19
10
1
icon: PPE PPE
189

United Kingdom PPE

2

Lithuania PPE

2

Ireland PPE

2
5
5

Cyprus PPE

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Malta PPE

2

Estonia PPE

For (1)

1

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
161

Netherlands S&D

For (2)

2

Croatia S&D

2

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Latvia S&D

1

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2

Hungary S&D

2

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Malta S&D

3

Denmark S&D

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
51

Germany ALDE

Abstain (1)

3

Romania ALDE

2

Portugal ALDE

1

United Kingdom ALDE

1

Austria ALDE

For (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

For (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

For (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

2

Sweden ALDE

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
48

Italy Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Hungary Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
41

France GUE/NGL

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

3

Czechia GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

Against (1)

3

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Sweden GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Denmark GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
51

Italy ECR

For (1)

1

Romania ECR

2

Czechia ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

1

Belgium ECR

2
2

Lithuania ECR

1

Netherlands ECR

2

Croatia ECR

For (1)

1

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1

Slovakia ECR

Abstain (1)

2

Cyprus ECR

1
icon: NI NI
17

Germany NI

Against (1)

2

France NI

Against (1)

2

United Kingdom NI

Against (2)

Abstain (1)

3

Hungary NI

Against (1)

3

NI

Abstain (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
36

Poland EFDD

1

France EFDD

Abstain (1)

3

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

2
icon: ENF ENF
26

Germany ENF

Against (1)

1

Poland ENF

2

Italy ENF

Against (2)

2

Belgium ENF

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

3

Austria ENF

Abstain (1)

4
AmendmentsDossier
523 2017/2279(INI)
2018/02/23 BUDG 34 amendments...
source: 618.252
2018/02/28 REGI 405 amendments...
source: 618.191
2018/03/01 EMPL 84 amendments...
source: 619.046

History

(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)

docs/6/body
EC
events/2/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2018-0138&language=EN
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/A-8-2018-0138_EN.html
events/5/docs/0/url
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2018-0105
New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2018-0105_EN.html
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Regional Development
committee
REGI
rapporteur
name: JOULAUD Marc date: 2017-10-10T00:00:00 group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Regional Development
committee
REGI
date
2017-10-10T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: JOULAUD Marc group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
rapporteur
name: OMARJEE Younous date: 2018-01-10T00:00:00 group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
date
2018-01-10T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: OMARJEE Younous group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
rapporteur
name: ULVSKOG Marita date: 2018-01-11T00:00:00 group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
date
2018-01-11T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: ULVSKOG Marita group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Culture and Education
committee
CULT
rapporteur
name: DIACONU Mircea date: 2017-12-05T00:00:00 group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Culture and Education
committee
CULT
date
2017-12-05T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: DIACONU Mircea group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
activities
  • date: 2018-01-18T00:00:00 body: EP type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2018-01-10T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: OMARJEE Younous body: EP responsible: False committee: CULT date: 2017-12-05T00:00:00 committee_full: Culture and Education rapporteur: group: ALDE name: DIACONU Mircea body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2018-01-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: ULVSKOG Marita body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: BRESSO Mercedes group: ECR name: TOMAŠIĆ Ruža group: ALDE name: VAN MILTENBURG Matthijs group: GUE/NGL name: MICHELS Martina group: EFD name: D'AMATO Rosa responsible: True committee: REGI date: 2017-10-10T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development rapporteur: group: EPP name: JOULAUD Marc
  • date: 2018-03-27T00:00:00 body: EP type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading committees: body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2018-01-10T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: OMARJEE Younous body: EP responsible: False committee: CULT date: 2017-12-05T00:00:00 committee_full: Culture and Education rapporteur: group: ALDE name: DIACONU Mircea body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2018-01-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: ULVSKOG Marita body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: BRESSO Mercedes group: ECR name: TOMAŠIĆ Ruža group: ALDE name: VAN MILTENBURG Matthijs group: GUE/NGL name: MICHELS Martina group: EFD name: D'AMATO Rosa responsible: True committee: REGI date: 2017-10-10T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development rapporteur: group: EPP name: JOULAUD Marc
  • date: 2018-04-06T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2018-0138&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A8-0138/2018 body: EP type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
  • date: 2018-04-16T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20180416&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament body: EP type: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2018-04-17T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=30995&l=en type: Results of vote in Parliament title: Results of vote in Parliament url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2018-0105 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading title: T8-0105/2018 body: EP type: Results of vote in Parliament
commission
  • body: EC dg: Regional and Urban Policy commissioner: CREȚU Corina
committees/0
type
Responsible Committee
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Regional Development
committee
REGI
date
2017-10-10T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: JOULAUD Marc group: European People's Party (Christian Democrats) abbr: PPE
shadows
committees/0
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
BUDG
date
2018-01-10T00:00:00
committee_full
Budgets
rapporteur
group: GUE/NGL name: OMARJEE Younous
committees/1
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Budgets
committee
BUDG
date
2018-01-10T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: OMARJEE Younous group: European United Left - Nordic Green Left abbr: GUE/NGL
committees/1
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
CULT
date
2017-12-05T00:00:00
committee_full
Culture and Education
rapporteur
group: ALDE name: DIACONU Mircea
committees/2
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
committee
EMPL
date
2018-01-11T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: ULVSKOG Marita group: Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats abbr: S&D
committees/2
body
EP
responsible
False
committee
EMPL
date
2018-01-11T00:00:00
committee_full
Employment and Social Affairs
rapporteur
group: S&D name: ULVSKOG Marita
committees/3
type
Committee Opinion
body
EP
associated
False
committee_full
Culture and Education
committee
CULT
date
2017-12-05T00:00:00
rapporteur
name: DIACONU Mircea group: Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe abbr: ALDE
committees/3
body
EP
shadows
responsible
True
committee
REGI
date
2017-10-10T00:00:00
committee_full
Regional Development
rapporteur
group: EPP name: JOULAUD Marc
docs
  • date: 2017-10-09T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/docs_autres_institutions/commission_europeenne/com/2017/0583/COM_COM(2017)0583_EN.pdf title: COM(2017)0583 url: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/smartapi/cgi/sga_doc?smartapi!celexplus!prod!DocNumber&lg=EN&type_doc=COMfinal&an_doc=2017&nu_doc=0583 title: EUR-Lex type: Document attached to the procedure body: EC
  • date: 2018-01-31T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE616.856 title: PE616.856 type: Committee draft report body: EP
  • date: 2018-02-28T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE618.191 title: PE618.191 type: Amendments tabled in committee body: EP
  • date: 2018-03-20T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE616.606&secondRef=03 title: PE616.606 committee: CULT type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2018-03-21T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE616.664&secondRef=02 title: PE616.664 committee: BUDG type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2018-03-22T00:00:00 docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE617.994&secondRef=02 title: PE617.994 committee: EMPL type: Committee opinion body: EP
  • date: 2018-08-30T00:00:00 docs: url: /oeil/spdoc.do?i=30995&j=0&l=en title: SP(2018)401 type: Commission response to text adopted in plenary
events
  • date: 2018-01-18T00:00:00 type: Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2018-03-27T00:00:00 type: Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading body: EP
  • date: 2018-04-06T00:00:00 type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2018-0138&language=EN title: A8-0138/2018 summary: The Committee on Regional Development adopted the own-initiative report by Marc JOULAUD (EPP, FR) on strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion in the European Union: the 7th report of the European Commission. The 7th Cohesion Report shows that regional disparities are narrowing again, but that the picture is highly uneven, whether measured by GDP per head, employment or other indicators, and that certain disparities persist, or are shifting or growing, between and within regions and Member States, including inside the euro area. It also contains worrying information about unemployment rates, including youth unemployment rates, which in many regions have not reverted to the levels seen before the crisis, and about competitiveness, poverty and social inclusion. The added value of cohesion policy : Members considered it crucial that cohesion policy in the new programming period should continue to adequately cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main public investment instrument based on long-term strategy and perspectives, with a budget commensurate with existing and new challenges, and ensuring the fulfilment of the basic goals of the policy. Cohesion policy provides European added value by contributing to European public goods and priorities (such as growth, social inclusion, innovation and environmental protection), as well as to public and private investment, and that it is a fundamental tool for achieving the Treaty objective of combating disparities with a view to the upward adaptation of living standards and reducing the backwardness of the least favoured regions. Members stressed that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take into account national development needs along with the needs and specificities of different regions and territories, and to bring the Union closer to its citizens. The ‘middle-income regions’ : the report noted that the ‘middle-income regions’ have not grown at the same rate as either the low-income regions (which still need to catch up with the rest of the EU) and the regions with very high income, as they face the challenge referred to as the ‘middle-income trap’, because of their excessively high costs in comparison with the former and excessively weak innovation systems in comparison with the latter. Members are convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to the middle-income regions. Fields of action : Member stressed that employment (including youth unemployment), social inclusion, fighting poverty, supporting innovation, digitalisation, support for SMEs and start-ups, climate change, the circular economy and infrastructure should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future . They also noted that a specific post-2020 financing mechanism must be created under Article 349 TFEU to integrate migrants in the outermost regions, which have to cope with greater migratory pressure owing to their specific characteristics, and thus contribute to their sustainable development. A simplified cohesion policy : the Commission is called on to take account of the recommendations of the High Level Group on Simplification in its future legislative proposals. Members stressed the need to provide a framework which guarantees legal stability through simple, clear and predictable rules, particularly as regards management and auditing, in order to ensure a proper balance between performance and simplification objectives. Members called for a reduction in the volume of legislation and guidelines. Challenges and prospects : Members are extremely concerned at the scenarios recently presented by the Commission, concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude many regions from the scope of cohesion policy. They wish to see an ambitious budget commensurate with the challenges facing the regions. They considered that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection. However, the report stressed that cohesion policy cannot be the solution to all crises, and opposes the use of cohesion policy funds to cover short-term financing needs outside the policy’s scope. Lastly, Members noted that some European regions are particularly exposed to the impact of Brexit . They stressed that the future cohesion policy must minimise the negative impact of Brexit on other European regions, and called for detailed consideration to be given to the possibility of continuing partnerships in the context of territorial cooperation.
  • date: 2018-04-16T00:00:00 type: Debate in Parliament body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20180416&type=CRE title: Debate in Parliament
  • date: 2018-04-17T00:00:00 type: Results of vote in Parliament body: EP docs: url: https://oeil.secure.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/popups/sda.do?id=30995&l=en title: Results of vote in Parliament
  • date: 2018-04-17T00:00:00 type: Decision by Parliament, 1st reading/single reading body: EP docs: url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=TA&language=EN&reference=P8-TA-2018-0105 title: T8-0105/2018 summary: The European Parliament adopted by 506 votes to 71, with 45 abstentions, a resolution on strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion in the European Union: the 7th report of the European Commission. The 7th Cohesion Report shows that regional disparities are narrowing again, but that the picture is highly uneven , whether measured by GDP per head, employment or other indicators, and that certain disparities persist, or are shifting or growing, between and within regions and Member States, including inside the euro area. It also contains worrying information about unemployment rates, including youth unemployment rates, which in many regions have not reverted to the levels seen before the crisis, and about competitiveness, poverty and social inclusion. Added value of cohesion policy : Parliament stressed that cohesion policy provides European added value by contributing to European public goods and priorities (such as growth, social inclusion, innovation and environmental protection), as well as to public and private investment, and that it is a fundamental tool for achieving the Treaty objective of combating disparities with a view to the upward adaptation of living standards and reducing the backwardness of the least favoured regions. European added value is strongly reflected in European territorial cooperation (ETC). Members considered it crucial that cohesion policy in the new programming period should continue to adequately cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main public investment instrument based on long-term strategy and perspectives. A concentration of cohesion policy exclusively on the least developed regions would hinder progress on the political priorities of the Union as a whole. They reiterated their commitment to shared management and the partnership principle, which should be preserved and strengthened for the post-2020 period, as well as to multi-level governance. Territorial dimension : Parliament stressed the importance of supporting rural territories by encouraging investment in projects that support the local economy and accompany these regions in the difficulties they face, such as rural desertification, social inclusion, lack of professional opportunities, the destruction of town centres or areas without healthcare. It called for certain territorial characteristics, such as those of island, mountain, rural, border, northern, coastal or peripheral regions, to be better taken into account when defining investment priorities. The introduction of integrated strategies for sustainable urban development would also merit further development and replication in other sub-regional territories. The ‘middle-income regions’ : Members noted that the ‘middle-income regions’ have not grown at the same rate as either the low-income regions (which still need to catch up with the rest of the EU) and the regions with very high income, as they face the challenge referred to as the ‘middle-income trap’, because of their excessively high costs in comparison with the former and excessively weak innovation systems in comparison with the latter. Members are convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to the middle-income regions. Fields of action : Parliament stressed that employment (including youth unemployment), social inclusion, fighting poverty, supporting innovation, digitalisation, support for SMEs and start-ups, climate change, the circular economy and infrastructure should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future . It also noted that a specific post-2020 financing mechanism must be created under Article 349 TFEU to integrate migrants in the outermost regions, which have to cope with greater migratory pressure owing to their specific characteristics, and thus contribute to their sustainable development. A simplified cohesion policy : Parliament stressed the need to provide a framework which guarantees legal stability through simple, clear and predictable rules , particularly as regards management and auditing, in order to ensure a proper balance between performance and simplification objectives. It suggested a simplified procedure for the targeted modification of operational programmes during programming (e.g. in the case of natural disasters). Challenges and prospects : Members are extremely concerned at the scenarios recently presented by the Commission, concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude many regions from the scope of cohesion policy. They wish to see an ambitious budget commensurate with the challenges facing the regions. They considered that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection. However, Parliament stressed that cohesion policy cannot be the solution to all crises, and opposes the use of cohesion policy funds to cover short-term financing needs outside the policy’s scope. It also called for every effort to be made to avoid delays in programming for the next period in order to prevent late payments . Some European regions are particularly exposed to the impact of Brexit. Parliament stressed that the future cohesion policy must minimise the negative impact of Brexit on other European regions, and called for detailed consideration to be given to the possibility of continuing partnerships in the context of territorial cooperation.
  • date: 2018-04-17T00:00:00 type: End of procedure in Parliament body: EP
links
other
  • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/regional-and-urban-policy_en title: Regional and Urban Policy commissioner: CREȚU Corina
procedure/Modified legal basis
Old
Rules of Procedure EP 150
New
Rules of Procedure EP 159
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
Old
REGI/8/11512
New
  • REGI/8/11512
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 54
procedure/legal_basis/0
Rules of Procedure EP 52
procedure/subject
Old
  • 4 Economic, social and territorial cohesion
New
4
Economic, social and territorial cohesion
activities/0
date
2018-01-18T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single reading
committees
activities/1
date
2018-03-27T00:00:00
body
EP
type
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single reading
committees
activities/2
date
2018-04-06T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=REPORT&mode=XML&reference=A8-2018-0138&language=EN type: Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading title: A8-0138/2018
body
EP
type
Committee report tabled for plenary, single reading
activities/3
date
2018-04-16T00:00:00
docs
url: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?secondRef=TOC&language=EN&reference=20180416&type=CRE type: Debate in Parliament title: Debate in Parliament
body
EP
type
Debate in Parliament
activities/4
date
2018-04-17T00:00:00
docs
body
EP
type
Results of vote in Parliament
other/0/commissioner
Old
MOSCOVICI Pierre
New
CREȚU Corina
other/0/dg/title
Old
Economic and Financial Affairs
New
Regional and Urban Policy
other/0/dg/url
Old
http://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/economic-and-financial-affairs_en
New
http://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/regional-and-urban-policy_en
procedure/Modified legal basis
Rules of Procedure EP 150
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee
REGI/8/11512
procedure/legal_basis/0
Old
Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
New
Rules of Procedure EP 52
procedure/stage_reached
Old
Preparatory phase in Parliament
New
Procedure completed
activities
    committees
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: BUDG date: 2018-01-10T00:00:00 committee_full: Budgets rapporteur: group: GUE/NGL name: OMARJEE Younous
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: CULT date: 2017-12-05T00:00:00 committee_full: Culture and Education rapporteur: group: ALDE name: DIACONU Mircea
    • body: EP responsible: False committee: EMPL date: 2018-01-11T00:00:00 committee_full: Employment and Social Affairs rapporteur: group: S&D name: ULVSKOG Marita
    • body: EP shadows: group: S&D name: BRESSO Mercedes group: ECR name: TOMAŠIĆ Ruža group: ALDE name: VAN MILTENBURG Matthijs group: GUE/NGL name: MICHELS Martina group: EFD name: D'AMATO Rosa responsible: True committee: REGI date: 2017-10-10T00:00:00 committee_full: Regional Development rapporteur: group: EPP name: JOULAUD Marc
    links
    other
    • body: EC dg: url: http://ec.europa.eu/info/departments/economic-and-financial-affairs_en title: Economic and Financial Affairs commissioner: MOSCOVICI Pierre
    procedure
    reference
    2017/2279(INI)
    title
    Strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion in the European Union: 7th report of the European Commission
    legal_basis
    Rules of Procedure of the European Parliament EP 052
    stage_reached
    Preparatory phase in Parliament
    subtype
    Initiative
    type
    INI - Own-initiative procedure
    subject
    4 Economic, social and territorial cohesion