Progress: Procedure completed
Role | Committee | Rapporteur | Shadows |
---|---|---|---|
Lead | REGI | JOULAUD Marc ( PPE) | BRESSO Mercedes ( S&D), TOMAŠIĆ Ruža ( ECR), VAN MILTENBURG Matthijs ( ALDE), D'AMATO Rosa ( EFDD) |
Committee Opinion | CULT | DIACONU Mircea ( ALDE) | Silvia COSTA ( S&D), Liadh NÍ RIADA ( GUE/NGL), Bogdan Brunon WENTA ( PPE) |
Committee Opinion | BUDG | Bernd KÖLMEL ( ECR), Ivana MALETIĆ ( PPE), Sophie MONTEL ( ENF), Stanisław ŻÓŁTEK ( ENF) | |
Committee Opinion | EMPL | ULVSKOG Marita ( S&D) | Sergio GUTIÉRREZ PRIETO ( S&D), Jasenko SELIMOVIC ( ALDE), Jana ŽITŇANSKÁ ( ECR) |
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54
Legal Basis:
RoP 54Events
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.
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
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2018)401
- Results of vote in Parliament: Results of vote in Parliament
- Decision by Parliament: T8-0105/2018
- Debate in Parliament: Debate in Parliament
- Committee report tabled for plenary: A8-0138/2018
- Committee opinion: PE617.994
- Committee opinion: PE616.664
- Committee opinion: PE616.606
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE618.191
- Committee draft report: PE616.856
- Document attached to the procedure: COM(2017)0583
- Document attached to the procedure: EUR-Lex
- Document attached to the procedure: COM(2017)0583 EUR-Lex
- Committee draft report: PE616.856
- Amendments tabled in committee: PE618.191
- Committee opinion: PE616.606
- Committee opinion: PE616.664
- Committee opinion: PE617.994
- Commission response to text adopted in plenary: SP(2018)401
Activities
- Danuta JAZŁOWIECKA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Marc JOULAUD
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Ivana MALETIĆ
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Notis MARIAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Csaba SÓGOR
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Miguel VIEGAS
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Bogdan Brunon WENTA
Plenary Speeches (1)
- Maria Gabriela ZOANĂ
Plenary Speeches (1)
Votes
A8-0138/2018 - Marc Joulaud - am 1 17/04/2018 13:49:56.000 #
?? | 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
|
|
ENF |
28
|
4
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
NI |
19
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
Greece NIAgainst (1) |
2
|
3
|
3
|
2
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
EFDD |
37
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
3
|
United Kingdom EFDDFor (11)Against (4) |
1
|
Italy EFDDAgainst (12)Abstain (1) |
1
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
ALDE |
54
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
3
|
3
|
1
|
4
|
2
|
Belgium ALDEFor (2)Against (4) |
2
|
4
|
Netherlands ALDEAgainst (6) |
4
|
1
|
2
|
1
|
Spain ALDEFor (1)Against (6) |
2
|
||||||||||
GUE/NGL |
45
|
2
|
4
|
1
|
1
|
Greece GUE/NGLAgainst (5) |
1
|
2
|
3
|
2
|
4
|
1
|
3
|
Germany GUE/NGLAgainst (7) |
||||||||||||||||
ECR |
54
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
2
|
2
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
United Kingdom ECRAgainst (10) |
Poland ECRFor (1)Against (15) |
1
|
Germany ECRAgainst (5) |
|||||||||||||
Verts/ALE |
50
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
4
|
2
|
France Verts/ALEAgainst (6) |
United Kingdom Verts/ALEAgainst (6) |
Spain Verts/ALEAgainst (5) |
1
|
Germany Verts/ALEAgainst (12) |
|||||||||||
S&D |
171
|
1
|
1
|
3
|
1
|
1
|
1
|
2
|
Austria S&DAgainst (5) |
4
|
2
|
3
|
2
|
4
|
4
|
Sweden S&DAgainst (6) |
3
|
4
|
France S&DFor (1)Against (11) |
Portugal S&DFor (1)Against (7) |
Romania S&DFor (2)Against (10) |
United Kingdom S&DFor (3)Against (18) |
Poland S&DAgainst (5) |
Spain S&DFor (1)Against (12) |
Italy S&DFor (3)Against (23)
Andrea COZZOLINO,
Brando BENIFEI,
Caterina CHINNICI,
Damiano ZOFFOLI,
Daniele VIOTTI,
David Maria SASSOLI,
Elena GENTILE,
Elly SCHLEIN,
Enrico GASBARRA,
Goffredo Maria BETTINI,
Isabella DE MONTE,
Luigi MORGANO,
Mercedes BRESSO,
Michela GIUFFRIDA,
Nicola CAPUTO,
Nicola DANTI,
Paolo DE CASTRO,
Patrizia TOIA,
Pier Antonio PANZERI,
Renata BRIANO,
Roberto GUALTIERI,
Silvia COSTA,
Simona BONAFÈ
|
Germany S&DAgainst (24)
Arndt KOHN,
Arne LIETZ,
Bernd LANGE,
Birgit SIPPEL,
Constanze KREHL,
Dietmar KÖSTER,
Evelyne GEBHARDT,
Gabriele PREUSS,
Ismail ERTUG,
Jakob von WEIZSÄCKER,
Jens GEIER,
Jo LEINEN,
Joachim SCHUSTER,
Kerstin WESTPHAL,
Knut FLECKENSTEIN,
Maria NOICHL,
Martina WERNER,
Michael DETJEN,
Norbert NEUSER,
Peter SIMON,
Petra KAMMEREVERT,
Susanne MELIOR,
Tiemo WÖLKEN,
Ulrike RODUST
Abstain (1) |
||||
PPE |
200
|
2
|
1
|
5
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
1
|
2
|
5
|
5
|
3
|
Hungary PPEAgainst (11)Abstain (1) |
5
|
Greece PPEAgainst (4) |
4
|
Sweden PPEAgainst (4) |
Czechia PPEAgainst (6) |
Netherlands PPEFor (1)Against (4) |
Bulgaria PPEFor (1)Against (6) |
France PPEFor (1)Against (16) |
Portugal PPEAgainst (7) |
2
|
Poland PPEAgainst (20)
Adam SZEJNFELD,
Agnieszka KOZŁOWSKA,
Andrzej GRZYB,
Barbara KUDRYCKA,
Bogdan Andrzej ZDROJEWSKI,
Bogdan Brunon WENTA,
Czesław Adam SIEKIERSKI,
Danuta JAZŁOWIECKA,
Danuta Maria HÜBNER,
Dariusz ROSATI,
Elżbieta Katarzyna ŁUKACIJEWSKA,
Jan OLBRYCHT,
Jarosław KALINOWSKI,
Jarosław WAŁĘSA,
Jerzy BUZEK,
Julia PITERA,
Krzysztof HETMAN,
Marek PLURA,
Michał BONI,
Tadeusz ZWIEFKA
|
Spain PPEAgainst (16)
Agustín DÍAZ DE MERA GARCÍA CONSUEGRA,
Antonio LÓPEZ-ISTÚRIZ WHITE,
Carlos ITURGAIZ,
Esteban GONZÁLEZ PONS,
Esther HERRANZ GARCÍA,
Francisco José MILLÁN MON,
Francisco de Paula GAMBUS MILLET,
Gabriel MATO,
José Ignacio SALAFRANCA SÁNCHEZ-NEYRA,
Luis de GRANDES PASCUAL,
Pilar AYUSO,
Pilar DEL CASTILLO VERA,
Ramón Luis VALCÁRCEL SISO,
Rosa ESTARÀS FERRAGUT,
Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ,
Verónica LOPE FONTAGNÉ
|
12
|
Germany PPEAgainst (32)
Albert DESS,
Andreas SCHWAB,
Angelika NIEBLER,
Axel VOSS,
Birgit COLLIN-LANGEN,
Burkhard BALZ,
Christian EHLER,
Daniel CASPARY,
David MCALLISTER,
Dennis RADTKE,
Dieter-Lebrecht KOCH,
Elmar BROK,
Godelieve QUISTHOUDT-ROWOHL,
Ingeborg GRÄSSLE,
Jens GIESEKE,
Joachim ZELLER,
Karl-Heinz FLORENZ,
Manfred WEBER,
Markus FERBER,
Markus PIEPER,
Michael GAHLER,
Monika HOHLMEIER,
Norbert LINS,
Peter JAHR,
Peter LIESE,
Rainer WIELAND,
Reimer BÖGE,
Renate SOMMER,
Sabine VERHEYEN,
Sven SCHULZE,
Thomas MANN,
Werner LANGEN
|
A8-0138/2018 - Marc Joulaud - résolution de la commission REGI 17/04/2018 13:50:21.000 #
Amendments | Dossier |
523 |
2017/2279(INI)
2018/02/23
BUDG
34 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses the crucial role cohesion policy has played in the achievement of economic and social convergence in the EU; stresses its potential for creating a European standard on social rights within the Union and its mission of providing support in the restructuring of European economies, to help them adapt to the technological revolution and cope with population aging and the opening up of European and world markets; stresses, in this regard, that it is a beacon of European solidarity, something that it must continue to embody; expresses concern, however, that inequalities persist between rich and poor regions and between the salaries of the social categories of citizens, and that many regions classed as ‘intermediate’ have suffered general impoverishment; stresses that neither the objectives nor the EU funding of cohesion policy should be watered down; questions whether cohesion policy funding should be conditional on respect for the rule of law, which could penalise final contributors while reinforcing measures taken at national level;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Points out that Brexit will considerably increase the financial burden of maintaining or enhancing the cohesion policy's objectives and its funding from the EU budget;
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes the shortcomings of the financial planning and implementation system, which have led to the accumulation of unpaid bills and to a form of fraudulent budgeting that runs counter to the spirit of the Treaties; expresses concern at the significant delays in the adoption of operational programmes and in the designation of management, payment and certification authorities for cohesion policy, which have led to extremely low absorption rates of cohesion policy in the current programming period with the project organisers themselves bearing the brunt of the effects; calls in this connection for the simplification begun as part of the review of the Financial Regulation in force since 1 January 2016 to be enhanced, in particular by placing greater emphasis on ex-post checks and harmonising procedures at the level of each fund and introducing greater flexibility in the next multiannual financial framework; stresses that the level of payment appropriations should at least match past commitments, with a view to continuing to support the creativity of our regions;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes the shortcomings of the financial planning and implementation system, which have led to
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes the shortcomings of the financial planning and implementation
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Notes the shortcomings of the financial planning and implementation system, which have led to the accumulation of unpaid bills; expresses concern at the significant delays in the adoption of operational programmes and in the designation of management, payment and certification authorities for cohesion policy, which have led to extremely low absorption rates of cohesion policy in the current programming period; s
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Notes that each year the difference between estimated and actual payments from the EU budget for Cohesion policy is huge and calls on the European Commission to define a methodology for better planning of EU budget execution in close cooperation with Member States; stresses that establishment of the e- Cohesion system in which Member States would enter data on project pipelines, procurement plans with planned and actual dates for tendering, contracting and implementation, as well as all financial and accounting data related to invoices, co-financing, eligibility of expenditures etc. would be an important contribution to better management and monitoring of Cohesion Policy implementation in Member States, as well as to more precise estimations of payments from the EU budget.
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Notes that infrastructure projects within cohesion policy will frequently involve time scales that extend beyond the scope of a 7 year MFF and therefore acknowledges the requirement to develop budgeting frameworks that enable effective long term planning to take place;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 b (new) 2b. Underlines that EU funding needs to focus on areas in which the highest EU added value can be achieved, therefore the system of allocation of ESI funds should be revised by adding criteria linked to challenges the EU faces, such as demographics, unemployment, social inclusion, migration, innovation and climate change.
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 c (new) 2c. Takes into account that poor institutional quality reduces competitiveness, the impact of investment and economic growth; therefore stresses that the link between economic governance and the European Semester needs to be strengthened in order to ensure improvement of the quality of governance, implementation of structural reforms and strengthening administrative capacities with the aim of fostering convergence and thus increasing the efficiency and effectiveness of Cohesion Policy investments.
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that financial instruments in EU cohesion policy should not replace direct grants and aid, but should be treated as complementary tools that extend the scope of the project or where projects generate income; and also stresses that the logic of the Commission’s December 2017 report “Financial instruments under the European Structural and Investment Funds” should be followed and therefore financial instruments should be used less in those programmes where they have the least impact, i.e. the ESF and the European Fund for Agricultural Development;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses the crucial role
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that financial instruments in EU cohesion policy should not replace direct grants and aid, but should be treated as complementary tools; emphasises in this connection that the ESI funds and EFSI are managed according to different approaches, and that cooperation between these two funds could be beneficial for large-scale projects, but that such links must in no way undermine the strategic coherence, territorial concentration and long-term prospects of cohesion policy programmes;
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Stresses that financial instruments in EU cohesion policy should not replace direct grants and aid, but should be treated as complementary tools; nevertheless asks that the possibilities for new financial instruments in cohesion policy should be explored;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Is critical of the link made between the European Structural and Investment Funds, sound economic governance and the relevant country-specific recommendations; is opposed to macro- economic conditionality, which allows payments or commitments to regions to be frozen if the Council decides that the Member State concerned has failed to take effective measures to correct its deficit;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Stresses that the legislative proposals for the next MFF should be submitted as soon as possible to avoid delays in the programming for the next period; Takes the view that cohesion policy ceilings should be raised so that the EU can finally have all the funds it needs to meet its objectives and priorities, as set out under the Treaties; points out that cohesion policy is supposed to protect the public from the negative effects of globalisation and provide financial assistance to SMEs, support research and cooperation projects, promote participation in initiatives to develop human capital, and that it must therefore remain strong, effective and visible for citizens;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Stresses that the legislative proposals for the next MFF should be submitted as soon as possible to avoid delays in the programming for the next period;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Stresses that the legislative proposals for the next MFF should be submitted as soon as possible to avoid delays in the programming for the next period;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4.
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Underlines the link between the quality of governance and successful public and private investment, innovation and growth; welcomes the holistic approach adopted in the 7th Cohesion Report and calls for these points to be taken fully into account in future cohesion funding;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Takes the view that cohesion policy should benefit all regions, in particular those with the greatest development delays and the Outermost Regions, and that in the most developed regions it should be directed towards the peripheral areas, which are most affected by poverty and are the least attractive in terms of development
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Takes the view that
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses the crucial role economic, social and territorial cohesion policy has played in the achievement of economic and social convergence
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Takes the view that cohesion policy should benefit all regions, in particular those with the greatest development delays and the Outermost Regions, and that in the most developed regions it should be directed towards the peripheral areas, which are most affected by poverty and are the least attractive in terms of development and working opportunities; .
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Stresses, therefore, that cohesion policy must not act to correct the effects of the single market or EU trade policy and the unequal competition they entail between Member States or with the Union's external partners;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Calls for greater coherence between cohesion policy and other EU policies, which, like trade agreements, undermine efforts made as part of regional policy to achieve the objective of convergence in the EU;
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Stresses that investing in and developing connectivity and infrastructure lessens the disparities between regions and peripheral areas and must be taken with high priority.
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Stresses the need to continue with and strengthen cohesion policy in the next multiannual programming period; is opposed to any attempts to slash the budget or distort regional policy, which remains the EU’s sole major solidarity policy.
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses the crucial role cohesion policy has played in
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses the crucial role cohesion policy has played in the achievement of economic and social convergence in the EU; expresses concern, however, that inequalities persist between rich and poor regions and between the salaries of the social categories of citizens; stresses that neither the objectives nor the EU funding of cohesion policy should be watered down; notes with concern that in many areas, like health and income, socio- economic disparities are increasing;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses the crucial role cohesion policy has played in the achievement of economic and social convergence in the EU; expresses concern, however, that inequalities persist between rich and poor regions and between the salaries of the social categories of citizens; stresses that neither the objectives nor the EU funding of cohesion policy should be watered down; further stresses that none of them must be conditioned by other EU policies or agendas;
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Stresses the crucial role cohesion policy has played in the achievement of economic and social convergence in the EU; expresses concern, however, that inequalities persist between
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Recalls that the absence of a fiscal union creates a risk that cohesion policies will not have a homogeneous impact, particularly in peripheral regions of the EU, as regions affected by fiscal dumping are badly damaged by it;
source: 618.252
2018/02/28
REGI
405 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 7 a (new) – having regard to the Pact of Amsterdam establishing the Urban Agenda for the EU, agreed at the Informal Meeting of EU Ministers Responsible for Urban Matters on 30 May 2016 in Amsterdam,
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that culture, the creative industries, tourism, education, youth and sport play a crucial role in shaping the future of the European Union and have tremendous potential in terms of generating European added value
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious development of the whole Union, leading to a strengthening of its economic, social and territorial
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Regrets that the Commission’s 7th report on economic, social and territorial cohesion does not make any quantitative or qualitative reference to
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for greater account to be taken of certain specific territorial characteristics, such as those of island, mountain or border regions, when investment priorities are set
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8.
Amendment 102 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for greater account to be taken of certain specific territorial characteristics, such as those of island, mountain or border regions, and of territories in which people are required to travel long distances to avail themselves of essential services (e.g. health, education, collective mobility) when investment priorities are set;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for greater account to be taken of certain specific territorial characteristics, such as those of island, mountain or border regions that are isolated and not readily accessible, when investment priorities are set;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 a (new) 8a. Stresses the importance of cross- border cooperation for better social cohesion between cross-border regions and local communities in the Member States;
Amendment 106 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 b (new) 8b. Calls for the continued implementation of the cross-border territorial cooperation programmes with candidate countries and other neighbouring countries in order to support their European aspirations and strengthen their European integration process;
Amendment 107 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that the particular structural social and economic situation of the outermost regions justifies specific measures, in accordance with Article 349 TFEU, and stresses the need to improve the specific measures for these regions by adjusting them whenever necessary; calls on the Commission to take the judgment of the Court of Justice of the EU of 15 December 2015 as the basis for ensuring that Article 349 TFEU is properly applied as regards the conditions governing access to the Structural Funds;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that the particular structural social and economic situation of the outermost regions justifies specific measures, in particular as regards the conditions governing access to the Structural Funds, in accordance with Article 349 TFEU
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 9. Recalls that the particular structural social and economic situation of the outermost regions justifies specific measures, in accordance with Article 349
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious development of the whole Union, leading to a strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion, in a spirit of solidarity and with the aim of promoting
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2a. Deplores the fact that, in what is the European Year of Cultural Heritage, the Commission report disregards culture and fails to highlight, by providing a breakdown by sector, the investments made by the Member States and regions in this area;
Amendment 110 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Reminds that the permanent natural and demographic situation of the northernmost regions (sparse population, cold climate, long distances to European markets) justifies specific measures in accordance with Article 174 TFEU; stresses the need to secure and extend the specific allocation for these regions in order to promote unions overall harmonious development and to enable inhabitants of the northernmost Europe to take full advantage of their regions specific characteristics;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Urges the Commission to develop an action plan to make the outermost regions a priority area for experimental projects which could be carried out in other European regions;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 a (new) 9a. Recalls the role of EU macro- regional strategies and their potential in the better implementation of the territorial dimension in cohesion policy;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 9 b (new) 9b. Urges the Commission to establish specific accessibility frameworks for outermost region residents, in such a way as to guarantee them convenient, affordable access to continental Europe on the same basis as other EU citizens;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that the introduction of integrated strategies for sustainable urban development has been a success and should be replicated in other sub-regional territories, for example by setting an integrated territorial objective alongside the thematic objectives; stresses that possibility to introduce preparation of Operational programmes based on Integrated territorial strategies and Smart specialisation strategies should be analysed.
Amendment 115 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that the introduction of integrated strategies for sustainable urban development has been a success and should be replicated in other sub-regional territories
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 10. Considers that the introduction of integrated strategies for sustainable urban development has been a success and should therefore be expanded and be replicated in other sub-regional territories, for example by setting an integrated territorial objective alongside the thematic objectives;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) 10a. Underlines the importance of local development and its ability to involve local actors in strategies for an integrated and place-based approach; considers that Community-led local development should be made obligatory underpinned by support for empowerment of local stakeholders and its scope of application extended;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 3 The
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution Subheading 3 Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious development of
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Notes that the EU's cohesion and rural development policies can be instrumental in promoting the restoration of cultural heritage, supporting cultural and creative industries and financing the capacity building of cultural professionals;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 10 a (new) Amendment 121 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11. Notes that middle-income regions have not grown at the same rate as low- income regions and 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; notes, moreover, that these territories are characterised by struggling manufacturing industries and by their vulnerability to shocks caused by socioeconomic alterations due to globali
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 11.
Amendment 123 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 11 a (new) 11a. Underlines that the austerity measures, the imposition of the single currency and the economic constraints imposed by the European Treaties have had a depressing and destabilizing effect on the economies of the Member States and the euro area;
Amendment 124 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to these regions,
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to these regions, and that cohesion policy must both reduce disparities and prevent vulnerable regions from falling behind, by taking account of the different trends and dynamics; urges the authorities of these regions to concentrate on establishing a favourable climate to attract investment;
Amendment 126 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to these regions, and that cohesion policy must both reduce disparities and prevent vulnerable regions from falling behind, by taking account of the different trends and dynamics; calls on the Commission to address the phenomenon of the middle- income trap;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support and Place- sensitive distributed development policies (PSDDP) to these regions, and that cohesion policy must both reduce disparities and prevent vulnerable regions from falling behind, by taking
Amendment 129 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to these different types of regions, and that cohesion policy must both reduce disparities and inequalities, as well as prevent vulnerable regions from falling behind, by taking account of the different trends and dynamics;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious development of the whole Union, leading to a strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion, in a spirit of solidarity and cooperation and with the aim of promoting growth, and reducing the backwardness of the least
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Underlines the importance of equal access to education, training and cultural activities in delivering genuine convergence and reducing disparities and socioeconomic inequalities among European regions;
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Is convinced that a major challenge for future cohesion policy will be to provide appropriate support to these regions, and that cohesion policy must both reduce disparities and prevent vulnerable regions from falling behind, by taking account of the different characteristics, trends and dynamics;
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 12. Is convinced that a
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Recalls that, in order to support the middle-income regions and to offer solutions to their problems, the future cohesion policy should properly cover, support and include them in the next programming period; furthermore, the Commission should reflect on an alternative system of categorization not based on a rigorous separation, but instead guided by a continuum principle along which all the different regions might be properly placed; in this context, recalls the importance of complementary indicators to the GDP in order to offer a more precise picture of the socio- economic conditions of these specific regions;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 12 a (new) 12a. Considers that more attention should be given to an early identification of vulnerabilities and to increase the ability of regions to adapt to new circumstances; takes the view that the impacts of the recent crises, such as the financial, social and climate crisis, have to be analysed and conclusions to be drawn for the role of cohesion policy in supporting regions' resilience without jeopardising the long-term nature of cohesion policy;
Amendment 134 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Welcomes the Commission’s launch of a pilot project to provide tailored support geared to the specific challenges facing regions in industrial transition; calls on the Commission to draw lessons from the pilot project as soon as possible, and believes that smart specialisation strategies have the potential to offer better support to these regions in their development strategies and, more generally, promote differentiated implementation at regional
Amendment 135 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Welcomes the Commission’s launch of a pilot project to provide tailored support geared to the specific challenges facing regions in industrial transition; calls on the Commission to draw lessons from the pilot project as soon as possible, and believes that smart specialisation strategies have the potential to offer better support to these regions in their development strategies and, more generally, promote differentiated implementation at regional level; believes that tailor-made support for regions in industrial transition should take a holistic approach and focus on managing the transition process including strategy building, public participation, capacity building and networking;
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Welcomes the Commission’s launch of a pilot project to provide tailored support geared to the specific challenges facing regions in industrial transition; calls on the Commission to draw lessons from the pilot project as soon as possible, and believes that smart specialisation strategies have the potential to offer better support to these regions in their development strategies and, more generally, promote differentiated implementation at regional level and expects to see the envisaged results being achieved soon;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 13 13. Welcomes the Commission’s launch of
Amendment 138 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Stresses that
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious and balanced development of the whole Union, leading to a strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion, in a spirit of solidarity and with the aim of promoting growth, and reducing the backwardness of the least favoured regions;
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Urges the Commission to continue investing in culture,
Amendment 140 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14.
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester; considers that urban dimension and social dimension of cohesion policy should be strengthened and better integrated with the economic policy, achieving the appropriate policy mix, taking into account also the territorial specifities.
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives, but reiterates its position that cohesion policy must not be subject to any conditionalities at European level that cannot be influenced by local and regional authorities and other beneficiaries; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;
Amendment 144 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives; is of the opinion that a system of positive incentives would be more in line with the performance orientation of these policies; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester and to properly involve local and regional authorities in order to increase efficiency and ownership of the process;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social, economic and fiscal convergence by providing incentives to the structural reforms and smart fiscal policies; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;
Amendment 148 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area, as well as the unequal conditions experienced by individual regions, may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A a (new) Aa. whereas balanced social and economic development throughout Europe is crucial to maintain and promote social peace and an innovative, sustainable and inclusive European integration process that is based on broad public support;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Urges the Commission to
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 14. Stresses that social and fiscal convergence help to foster cohesion while improving the functioning of the single market; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for territories which are lagging behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy
Amendment 151 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 a (new) 14a. Stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should be further strengthened as priority areas for cohesion policy in future;
Amendment 152 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 14 b (new) 14b. Regrets that the Commission did not come with more integrated evaluation of cross-cutting policies, and synergies between different European policies are not reported;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports
Amendment 155 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, in particular for young people, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future; takes the view that, in order meet these challenges, indicators complementary to per capita GDP should be taken into account in connection with the allocation of funds;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change – including risk-preparedness, energy efficiency and sustainable urban mobility – and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a
Amendment 159 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15.
Amendment 16 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report shows that
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Emphasises that public entities must receive funding, aid and subsidies under cohesion policy primarily in response to the need to conserve natural and historical heritage, but that cohesion policy must also support projects carried out by very small and small and medium-sized enterprises in the cultural and creative innovation sector, provided that the projects in question generate substantial added value, are financially viable, enjoy significant co- financing, are of high quality, are relevant to the needs of the region concerned and do not involve the large- scale use of the most insecure forms of employment;
Amendment 160 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs and different potentials, and the regions where results can be achieved; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;
Amendment 161 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that better employment
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs after inclusive consultation at local and regional levels; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;
Amendment 164 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration
Amendment 165 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, social inclusion, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change, affordable housing and the circular economy
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, transition to new technologies, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;
Amendment 168 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change, the demographic challenge and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that employment, social inclusion, innovation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report shows that regional disparities are
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Calls on the Commission to fully exploit potential synergies between cohesion policy and other EU policies; points out that much more can still be done to bring about a greater synergy between the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs) and other European programmes outlined for the 2014-2020 programming period, with specific reference to Erasmus+ and Creative Europe, through the provision of better information on an EU-wide basis and by means of much more resolute implementation in the Member States and their regions;
Amendment 170 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a limited number of priorities linked to major European political objectives, leaving managing authorities the task of drawing up their territorial strategies on the basis of their needs; stresses that infrastructure, employment, innovation, support for SMEs, climate
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports
Amendment 172 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 15 15. Supports a strong thematic concentration on a
Amendment 173 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 Amendment 174 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Welcomes the adoption of the European Pillar for Social Rights, which represents a step forward in building a social Europe; reiterates its commitment to the ESF, the Youth Guarantee and the Youth Employment Initiative in view of their role in meeting the challenges of employment, social inclusion, learning and vocational training; takes the view that, in order to successfully address current challenges, the ESF-share should be increased to at least 30%;
Amendment 175 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Welcomes the adoption of the European Pillar for Social Rights, which represents a step forward in building a social Europe; reiterates its commitment to the ESF as a strong integrated part of the ESI funds, the Youth Guarantee and the Youth Employment Initiative in view of their role in meeting the challenges of employment, social inclusion, learning and vocational training;
Amendment 176 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Welcomes the adoption of the European Pillar for Social Rights, which represents a step forward in building a social Europe; reiterates its commitment to the ESF, the Youth Guarantee, the European Solidarity Corps and the Youth Employment Initiative in view of their role in meeting the challenges of employment, social inclusion, learning and vocational training;
Amendment 177 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Welcomes the adoption of the European Pillar for Social Rights, which represents a step forward in building a social Europe; reiterates its commitment to the ESF as part of the ESIF, the Youth Guarantee and the Youth Employment Initiative in view of their role in meeting the challenges of employment, social inclusion, learning and vocational training;
Amendment 178 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16. Welcomes the adoption of the European Pillar for Social Rights, which represents a step forward in building a social Europe; reiterates its commitment to the ESF, the Youth Guarantee and the Youth Employment Initiative in view of their role in meeting the challenges of
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 16.
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution Recital B B. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report shows that regional disparities are narrowing again, but that the picture is uneven, and that certain disparities persist, or are shifting or growing, between
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Emphasises the huge innovation and employment potential of renewable energy sources; calls on the Commission to integrate a specific energy and environmental strategy into the EU's economic, social and territorial cohesion policies while also taking into account education and culture;
Amendment 180 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 – subparagraph 1 (new) Strongly opposes any attempt at separating European Social Fund from cohesion policy;
Amendment 181 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 16 a (new) 16a. Calls on the Council and the Parliament to keep, in the forthcoming review of the Regulation(s), at least 20 % of the total allocation of the ESF devoted to fighting poverty and social exclusion, and also to examine, in particular in the framework of the European Social Fund and the EU Programme for Employment and Social Innovation (EaSI), the funding possibilities for helping every Member State establish a minimum income scheme where it does not exist or improve the functioning and effectiveness of existing systems;
Amendment 182 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Emphasises that future cohesion policy should focus more on protecting and supporting communities and territories adversely affected by globalisation (plant relocations, job losses) and also by intra- EU similar trends; calls for the scope for coordination between the Structural Funds and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund to be explored and for the creation of a similar adjustment fund for intra-EU delocalization cases to be considered;
Amendment 183 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Emphasises that future cohesion policy should focus more on protecting and supporting communities and territories adversely affected by globalisation (plant relocations, job losses); calls for the
Amendment 184 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Emphasises that future cohesion policy should focus more on protecting and supporting marginalized communities and territories adversely affected by globalisation (plant relocations, job losses); calls for the scope for coordination between the Structural Funds and the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund to be explored;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 17 17. Emphasises that future cohesion policy should focus more on protecting and supporting communities and territories
Amendment 186 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another; considers that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement; insists on the need for greater local and regional involvement in measures to combat climate change, accurate information for citizens regarding measures to be taken and exchanges of good practice between municipalities and regions in different parts of the Union; insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Notes that vulnerability to climate
Amendment 188 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another; considers that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement; insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible; calls, in that context, on the Commission to work together with the Member States to ensure that solidarity instruments can be deployed in a prompt, effective and coordinated manner when disasters occur;
Amendment 189 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another; considers that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement; insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible; reminds that cohesion policy needs to take into account the COP21 agreement on climate change and the UN Sustainable Development Goals for 2030;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report contains worrying information about unemployment rates, particularly youth unemployment rates, which have not reverted to the levels seen before the crisis, and about competitiveness and social inclusion;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Stresses the importance of addressing social exclusion and including persons from disadvantaged backgrounds to ensure they have full and equal access to both culture and education;
Amendment 190 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another; considers that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement; insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible while taking into consideration intra- regional disparities, which could affect the necessary threshold for the activation of such instruments;
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another; considers that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible to help the EU meet its commitments under the Paris Climate Agreement; insists that funding under the solidarity instruments for use in the event of natural disasters should be made available as rapidly as possible; stresses the need for increasing convergence between the EU Civil Protection Mechanism and the European Solidarity Fund;
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies
Amendment 193 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 18 18. Notes that vulnerability to climate change varies widely from one region to another;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Calls for ESI funds to be used to address demographic challenges (ageing, population loss and demographic pressure) which affect European regions in a variety of specific ways; stresses in particular the need to provide adequate support to the territories, such as some outermost regions, facing growing population pressure caused by a high birth rate and large-scale irregular migration;
Amendment 195 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Calls for ESI funds to be used to address demographic challenges (ageing, population loss and demographic pressure) which affect European regions in a variety of specific ways; to safeguard demographic sustainability, by guaranteeing an ageing population access to suitable goods and services; and to help people to maintain a work-life balance;
Amendment 196 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Calls for ESI funds to be used to address demographic challenges (ageing, population loss and demographic pressure) which affect European regions in a variety of specific ways; insists that under no circumstances can the relocation of migrants be considered an acceptable solution to the demographic problems experienced at European level.
Amendment 197 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Calls for ESI funds to be used to address properly the demographic challenges
Amendment 198 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Calls for ESI funds to be used to address demographic challenges (ageing, population loss
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 19. Calls for ESI funds to
Amendment 2 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 15 a (new) – having regard to the Commission's reflection paper of 28 June 2017 on the Future of EU Finances;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that culture, education, youth and sport play a crucial role in shaping the future of the European Union
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution Recital C C. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report contains worrying information about unemployment rates, which in many regions have not reverted to the levels seen before the crisis, and about competitiveness and social inclusion;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3b. Emphasises that administrative procedures must be used which make for rigorous selection and monitoring of projects supported under cohesion policy, in particular as regards the achievement of objectives set, but that, at the same time, the administrative burden must be kept to a reasonable level and not constitute an obstacle for very small and small and medium-size enterprises which are seeking to obtain funding under cohesion policy and whose projects meet the selection criteria;
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Underlines that Investments through the ESIF fund support other political priorities such as research, digitalisation or combating climate change as well and stresses therefore that not only the poorest regions need support in these areas but all regions and a concentration of Cohesion policy on only the least developed regions would hinder progress in these political priorities in the whole European Union;
Amendment 201 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Urges the Commission to do everything required to ensure that the gender dimension is central to all aspects of cohesion policy;
Amendment 202 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Stresses the potential of investments in culture, heritage, youth and sport to create jobs and growth and to improve social cohesion;
Amendment 203 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 a (new) 19a. Calls on the Commission and the Council to facilitate a timely start of the next programming period in order to prevent late payments and decommitments which hamper positive results of cohesion policy;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 b (new) 19b. Stresses the need to promote further investments in quality education, training and vocational training, further improvements in the labour market for the creation of quality jobs and to tackle youth unemployment in particular; welcomes a promotion for social inclusion and to be more ambitious to combat poverty and any form of discrimination; supports the development of cultural and creative industries that are closely linked to innovation and creativity; highlights the investment priorities of research, technological development, innovation and creativity; investments in SMEs and start-ups and investments in digitalisation of industries and societies;
Amendment 205 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 b (new) 19b. Emphasises the importance of keeping same categories of regions, namely less developed, transition and more developed regions in the future programming framework to enable comparative studies on the impact of cohesion policy post 2020;
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 c (new) 19c. Stresses that although cohesion policy has mitigated the impact of the recent economic and financial crisis in the EU, and that of the austerity measures, regional disparities, as well as disparities in competitiveness and social inequalities, remain high; calls for strengthened action to reduce these disparities and prevent the development of new disparities in all types of regions, while maintaining and consolidating support for the regions so as to facilitate ownership of the policy in every type of region and to achieve EU objectives throughout the EU; considers, in this context, that more attention needs to be paid to making regions more resilient to sudden shocks;
Amendment 207 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 19 c (new) 19c. Regrets that the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF) has been not used to its limits; calls to explore of new opportunities to better support coastal areas;
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; considers that a non-exhaustive set of complementary indicators such as social progress index, poverty, demography and infrastructure quality are suitable in the process of programming the funding and for indicating the share of EU funding in order to adequately reflect the needs of the EU regions; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the regional unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate; invites the Commission to assess the possibility that the set of eligibility criteria are to be considered at the NUTS levels;
Amendment 209 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available, therefore, requests to the Commission and Eurostat to provide the greatest detail and geographical disaggregation possible in statistics of relevance for devising suitable European Cohesion policies; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate; Considers that demographic criteria could also be considered;
Amendment 21 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas the 7th
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3 b. Notes the importance of inclusion for migrants and refugees and how offering them equal access to education, training, apprenticeships in their new state of residence, along with the unique culture of their new state of residence helps them feel welcome and to integrate and settle;
Amendment 210 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level, while continuing to give priority to GDP per capita indicators, taking into account the need to reduce existing disparities at European level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the long- term unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate, as well as life expectancy;
Amendment 211 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; underlines that per capita GDP should remain the main indicator for the purpose of allocating funds; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate;
Amendment 212 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate; underlines, however, that the GDP should remain the main indicator for allocating funds;
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, up to date, reliable and available; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the unemployment rate
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP, which should remain the main indicator, for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable and available; supports the use of
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Stresses that the 7th Cohesion Report highlights the need to take account of indicators complementary to per capita GDP for the purpose of allocating funds, in line with the challenges and needs identified, including at sub-regional level; notes the importance of taking as a basis data which are of high quality, reliable, structured and available; supports the use of social criteria, in particular the unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 20 20. Stresses that
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Advocates st
Amendment 218 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Advocates stepping up integrated approaches, and stresses that the ESF must remain an integral component of European regional policy
Amendment 219 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Advocates stepping up integrated approaches, and str
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for the creation in the next programming period of
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 21. Advocates stepping up integrated approaches, and stresses that the ESF must remain an integral component of European regional policy, by virtue of its essential
Amendment 221 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Stresses that greater consideration should be given to respect for fundamental rights in the implementation of ESIF programmes; believes that fundamental rights can only be guaranteed when appropriate principles are established and underpinned by effective follow-up action, such as ex-ante conditionality;
Amendment 222 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 21 a (new) 21a. Underlines that grants must remain the main form of cohesion policy financing in the next programming period;
Amendment 223 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Emphasises that f
Amendment 224 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22.
Amendment 225 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Emphasises that financial instruments
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Emphasises that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value; notes, however, that the use of financial instruments must not become an end in itself or a substitute for grants; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;
Amendment 227 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Emphasises that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments, underlines therefore that the post-2020 cohesion policy should remain mainly grant-based;
Amendment 228 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Emphasises that grants should remain the main cohesion policy funding instrument, but acknowledges that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;
Amendment 229 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Emphasises that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value and in the areas where they are most relevant, as they are a market driven instrument; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report draws attention to the diversity of regions and territories, including within current categories of regions, owing to their specific circumstances (ultraperipherality, sparse population, low income, low growth, etc.), making a tailored approach essential;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for the creation in the next programming period of two thematic objectives on culture and education, explicitly referenced as such, in order to boost the effectiveness and efficiency of investments and projects;
Amendment 230 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Emphasises that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be
Amendment 231 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Emphasises that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they should be promoted only if they generate added value; stresses, however, that their effectiveness hinges on many factors (nature of the project, of the territory or of the risk) and that all regions, regardless of their level of development, must be free to determine the most appropriate method of financing; opposes any binding targets for the use of financial instruments;
Amendment 232 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Emphasi
Amendment 233 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22.
Amendment 234 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 22. Emphasises that financial instruments can be an effective lever and that they
Amendment 235 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 22 a (new) 22a. Stresses that low-risk financial instruments are preferable to equity, trust funds and some types of bond and proposes promoting loans at a subsidised rate - preferably with sufficiently long payback times - and regulating and facilitating forms of crowd funding and peer-to-peer and social lending;
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Calls for the conditions governing the use of financial instruments to be simplified and for the coordination of these instruments with grants
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Calls for the conditions governing the use of financial instruments to be simplified and for the coordination of these instruments with grants to be facilitated and the provisions of the future regulations should be sufficiently flexible and establish operational arrangements that allow for the combination of grants for the same project; emphasises the importance of the complementary role played by national development banks and institutions in implementing financial instruments tailored to local needs; regards it as essential to harmonise the rules on financial instruments, however they are managed;
Amendment 238 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 23. Calls for the conditions governing the use of financial instruments to be simplified and for the coordination of these instruments with grants to be facilitated; emphasises the importance of the complementary role played by national development banks and institutions in implementing financial instruments tailored to local needs; regards it as essential to harmonise the rules on financial instruments as much as possible, however they are managed;
Amendment 239 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) 23a. Calls for strengthening capacities ,where necessary, for the management of cohesion policy at national level in the Member States, with technical support from the Commission in order to ensure the more effective use of the available funds;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D D. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report draws attention to the significant diversity of regions and territories, including within current categories of regions, owing to their specific circumstances (ultraperipherality, low income, low growth, etc.), making a tailored approach essential;
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls for the creation in the next programming period of at least two thematic objectives on culture
Amendment 240 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 23 a (new) Amendment 241 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Believes that it is both legitimate and necessary to
Amendment 242 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Believes that it is both legitimate and necessary to establish a link between cohesion policy and the guarantee of an
Amendment 243 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Believes that it is both legitimate and necessary to establish a link between cohesion policy and the guarantee of an environment conducive to investment, effectiveness and the proper use of funds, while stressing that cohesion policy is not meant to be reduced to an instrument for serving priorities without reference to its objectives; expresses its support for a balanced link with economic governance where this helps to maximise the impact of ESI Funds;
Amendment 244 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Believes that it is both legitimate and necessary to establish a link between cohesion policy and the guarantee of an environment conducive to investment, effectiveness and the proper use of funds, while stressing that cohesion policy is not meant to be reduced to an instrument for serving priorities without reference to its objectives;
Amendment 245 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Believes that it is both legitimate and necessary to establish a link between
Amendment 246 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24.
Amendment 247 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Believes that
Amendment 248 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Believes that
Amendment 249 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 24. Believes that it is both legitimate and necessary to establish a link between cohesion policy and the guarantee of an environment conducive to investment, effectiveness and the proper use of funds, while stressing that cohesion policy is not meant to be reduced to an instrument for serving priorities without reference to its objectives; expresses its support for a balanced link with economic governance where this helps to maximise the impact of ESI Funds; calls on the Commission to overhaul the European Semester to strengthen its territorial dimension and take account of other factors which contribute to the achievement of cohesion objectives
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution Recital D a (new) Da. whereas almost 120 million Europeans (24%) are poor, living at-risk- of poverty, are severely materially deprived and/or live in households with low work intensity; whereas the number of working poor is increasing and the number of young unemployed people continues to be high;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. Highlights the potential of the cultural and creative sector (CCS) regarding youth employment; stresses that further promotion of and investment in the CCS may contribute substantially to improving investment, growth, innovation and employment; calls on the Commission to consider therefore the special opportunities offered by the whole CCS, including NGOs and small associations;
Amendment 250 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Regrets the decision of the European Commission to not take into account the position of the European Parliament, which expressed its opposition to macro-conditionality in its resolution "Building blocks for a post- 2020 EU Cohesion policy" voted on 13 June 2017, and thus to not proceed with a legislative proposal concerning article 23 of the Common Provisions Regulation aimed at reviewing the very rationale of the link between the European Semester and the cohesion policy;
Amendment 251 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Points out the unequal conditions faced by potential beneficiaries of cohesion policy resources at the regional and local levels in several Member States resulting from the insufficient application of the subsidiarity principle, unequal degrees of decentralisation and different financial capacities, which may determine whether they are able to use cohesion policy funds effectively;
Amendment 252 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Takes note of the review of the Commission of Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013; regrets that only descriptive information has been provided not allowing for in-depth analysis including impact assessment or assessment of alternatives that might have been helpful for clarifying the specificities of the relation between cohesion policy and economic governance;
Amendment 253 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 a (new) 24a. Underlines that the use of financial instruments and of ESI funds should not favour the delocalisation of companies.
Amendment 254 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 24 b (new) 24b. Stresses also that the reasons underlying the decision of the Commission to not address the issue of macro-conditionality are blatantly contradictory with the findings of the 7th Report itself (which states that the budget balance of sub-national governments has been transformed from a deficit of close to 1% of GDP in 2010 to a surplus, so that the overall general government deficit in 2016, which averaged just under 2% of GDP, was solely accounted for by central government and the Social Security funds); reiterates the need of eliminating any provision for penalties which are unjust, unnecessary and penalise in particular regional and local authorities and project beneficiaries;
Amendment 255 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued
Amendment 256 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued, and acknowledges the importance of ex-ante conditionalities, which have proved their worth, but stresses that they have been a source of complexity and delays in the development and launching of programming; calls on the Commission to reduce the number of ex ante conditionalities and, in this field, to improve compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, making maximum use of existing strategic documents; notes at the same time that the conditionalities must be well defined, geared towards the investments most closely tailored to the growth and jobs agenda and accompanied by clear performance evaluation indicators to ensure equal treatment for all Member States.
Amendment 257 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued, and acknowledges the importance of ex-ante conditionalities, which have proved their worth, but stresses that they have been a source of complexity and delays in the development and launching of programming; calls on the Commission to re
Amendment 258 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued, and acknowledges the importance of ex-ante conditionalities, which have proved their worth, but stresses that they have been a source of complexity and delays in the development and launching of programming; calls on the Commission
Amendment 259 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued, and acknowledges the importance of ex-ante conditionalities, which have proved their worth, but stresses that in specific cases they have been a source of complexity and delays in the development and launching of programming; calls on the Commission to reduce the number of ex ante conditionalities and, in this field, to improve compliance with the principles of proportionality and subsidiarity, making maximum use of existing strategic documents;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas one of the key pieces of new information provided by the 7th Cohesion Report concerns the identification of certain areas described as being caught in the ‘middle-income trap’, which risk
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Urges that objectives be set which offer private actors, in particular very small and small and medium-sized enterprises in the creative and cultural industries, greater scope, provided that the projects submitted meet the criteria of financial soundness, quality and consistency with clearly identified local needs;
Amendment 260 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued, and
Amendment 261 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 25. Calls for the smart specialisation strategies to be continued, and acknowledges the
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 25 a (new) 25a. Is concerned that the quality of governance in some Member States has decreased with government leaders drifting away from good governance which can also have impacts on the sound implementation of EU funded programmes; calls on all Member States to take due action in order to remove any shadow of doubt on transparency, independence and professionalism of public administrations;
Amendment 264 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Notes that the quality and the stability of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase the administrative capacit
Amendment 266 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities; believes that, particularly for lagging regions, the share earmarked for technical assistance and aimed at strengthening the administrative capacity of the Member States in the use of ESI funds should also be maintained in the new programming period and contain new performance indicators;
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities, provided that any increase is accompanied and supported by the administrative measures needed to achieve results in many territories which, more than others, encounter problems in using EU funds properly and effectively;
Amendment 268 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities; in this context, calls on the Commission, the Member States and the regional Authorities to adopt national and regional development strategies and programmes, in order to use the best practices aimed at improving administrative capacities and governance;
Amendment 269 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities; stresses that functional and flexible e-government solutions must be exploited. Monitoring and reporting activities should be optimized through increased digitalisation and standardisation of procedures.
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas one of the key pieces of new information provided by the 7th Cohesion Report concerns the identification of certain areas described as being caught in the ‘middle-income trap’, which risk a long-term stagnation if being left behind;
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Calls on the Commission to include culture and education among the priority and strategic objectives for the next programming period, as both areas of focus and horizontal dimensions of regional development policies;
Amendment 270 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to invest into maintenance and increase of administrative capacities as well as to promote financial sustainability of local and regional authorities;
Amendment 271 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities as well as to improve advisory assistance to authorities locally and capacity building at project level;
Amendment 272 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26.
Amendment 273 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities and promotes the exchange of best practices in this area;
Amendment 274 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to increase administrative capacities and ensure that technical resources are always available;
Amendment 275 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 26 26. Notes that the quality of public administration is a decisive factor in regional growth and the effectiveness of ESI funds; emphasises the need to i
Amendment 276 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Supports a shift in cohesion policy towards a greater focus on results, moving away from an accounting-based approach towards one which focuses on performance and allowing managing authorities more flexibility as to how to achieve targets while fully respecting horizontal principles, in particular on partnership and transparency;
Amendment 277 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Supports a shift in cohesion policy towards a greater focus on results and greater public investment management accountability, moving away from an accounting-based approach towards one which focuses on performance and allowing managing authorities more flexibility as to how to achieve targets;
Amendment 278 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 27. Supports a shift in cohesion policy towards a greater focus on results and on content as opposed to form, moving away from an accounting-based approach towards one which focuses on performance and allowing managing authorities more flexibility as to how to achieve targets;
Amendment 279 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution Recital E E. whereas one of the key pieces of new information provided by the 7th Cohesion Report concerns the identification of certain
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Members States to develop, within the sphere of cohesion policy, long-term strategies in the fields of culture, education, youth and sport, which can serve as a basis for strategic investments during the 2021-2027 programming period, with the emphasis being placed on projects which boost the economic dynamism of the regions concerned and to the creation of high- quality jobs;
Amendment 280 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Considers imperative to keep-up the fight against fraud, and urges to exert zero-tolerance for corruption;
Amendment 281 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 27 a (new) 27a. Calls on the Commission to evaluate the future JASPERS programme and to take into account recommendations of the European Court of Auditors by a) specifying the main objectives b) focus technical assistance on sectors and member states where administrative capacity is insufficient c) concentration on the substance rather than on project documentation d) providing the advisory services to the major projects e) mitigating the high risk of a lack of impartiality clarifying the roles of the main stakeholders;
Amendment 282 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28. Calls on the Commission to take account of the recommendations of the High-Level Group on Simplification in its future legislative proposals; the exchange of expertise should be facilitated by establishing a knowledge-sharing portal to exchange good practice examples and guides, explaining successful simplification measures put in place in certain regions or Member States.
Amendment 283 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 28 28. Calls on the Commission to take account of the recommendations of the High-Level Group on Simplification in its future legislative proposals, so as to ensure a balance between performance, simplification and safety objectives for management authorities and the beneficiaries;
Amendment 284 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Stresses the need to provide a framework which guarantees legal stability through simple, clear and predictable rules, particularly as regards management and checks; calls, in the next programming period, for a reduction in the volume of legislation and guidelines, for the relevant documents to be translated into all the EU languages and for any retrospective application and interpretation of rules to be banned; Underlines that a unified legal framework and guidelines on cross- border projects should be established and implemented over the diverse national legislation systems.
Amendment 285 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Stresses the need to provide a framework which guarantees legal stability through simple, clear and predictable rules, particularly as regards management and checks; calls, in the next programming period, for a reduction in the volume of legislation and guidelines, for all modifications to be developed in close cooperation with national authorities and partners, for the relevant documents to be translated into all the EU languages and for any retrospective application and interpretation of rules to be banned;
Amendment 286 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 29. Stresses the need to provide a framework which guarantees legal stability through simple, clear and predictable rules, particularly as regards management and checks; calls, in the next programming period, for a reduction in the volume of legislation and guidelines, for the relevant documents to be translated into all the EU languages
Amendment 287 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 29 a (new) 29a. Underlines that the most effective simplification comes from the stability and continuity of the procedures and regulations, to which the interested subjects and managing authorities are now familiar with; calls therefore for the next cohesion policy regulations to be changed only where strictly necessary;
Amendment 288 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Stresses, at the same time, the need to make operational programmes genuine strategic documents which are more concise and more flexible, establishing a simplified procedure for their modification during programming, by cutting red tape, calling for greater flexibility as regards compliance with the macroeconomic conditions laid down as part of the European Semester and, at the same time, releasing co-financing from the budgetary straitjacket imposed by the Stability Pact;
Amendment 289 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Stresses, at the same time, the need to make operational programmes genuine strategic documents which are more concise and more flexible, establishing a simplified procedure for their modification during programming, especially in case of unforeseen events like natural disasters;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G a (new) Ga. whereas the 7th Cohesion Report entails a chapter on the review of the application of measures linking effectiveness of ESI Funds to sound economic governance, deriving from the Commission's obligation as set out in Article 23 of Regulation (EU) No 1303/2013,
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 5. Calls on the Members States to develop, within the sphere of cohesion policy, long-term and sustainable strategies in the fields of culture, education, youth and sport, which can serve as a basis for strategic investments during the 2021-2027 programming period;
Amendment 290 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Stresses, at the same time, the need to make operational programmes genuine strategic documents which are more concise and more flexible by avoiding excessive regulation, establishing a simplified procedure for their modification during programming;
Amendment 291 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 30. Stresses, at the same time, the need to make operational programmes genuine strategic documents which are more concise and more flexible, establishing a simplified procedure for their targeted modification during
Amendment 292 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 30 a (new) 30a. Considers that the main principles and good practices enshrined in the article 5 of the current European Code of Conduct and concerning the involvement of relevant partners in the preparation of the Partnership Agreement and Operational Programmes should be actually implemented in the next post- 2020 framework, with particular focus on the issue of timely disclosure and easy access to relevant information, especially for civil society organizations; proposes, in this regard, a more binding European Code of Conduct on Partnerships and asks the Commission to consider setting a specific ex-ante conditionality to boost multilevel governance;
Amendment 293 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 31. Calls for a genuine single set of rules to be introduced for the
Amendment 294 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 31. Calls for a genuine single set of rules to be introduced for the various funds; supports consistent treatment of European funds under direct management and cohesion funds where State aid is concerned and, more generally, harmonised rules for European instruments aimed at the same beneficiaries; stresses the importance of greater complementarity between cohesion policy and the future EU research programme, in order to cover the full cycle from basic research to commercial applications; stresses on the necessity to revise state aid rules to become more consistent with the aims of regional policy and ensure a joint approach and adoption of programmes, acting also as a notification completed in the context of state aid.
Amendment 295 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 31. Calls for a genuine single set of rules to be introduced for the various funds; supports consistent treatment of European funds under direct management and cohesion funds where State aid is concerned and, more generally,
Amendment 296 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 31. Calls for a genuine single set of rules to be introduced for the various funds; supports consistent treatment of European funds under direct management and cohesion funds where State aid is concerned and, more generally, harmonised rules for European instruments aimed at the same beneficiaries; stresses the importance of greater complementarity between cohesion policy and the future EU research programme, in order to cover the full cycle from basic research to commercial applications; considers that thematic concentration should be preserved in order to enable synergies between different funding sources at project level;
Amendment 297 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 31. Calls for a genuine single set of rules to be maint
Amendment 298 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 a (new) 31a. Calls on the Commission to facilitate simplified, timely and flexible procedure for transferability of resources between regions, operational programmes and programme axes in order to adequately meet changing global reality and regional demand;
Amendment 299 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 31 a (new) 31a. Urges the Commission to address the issues affecting the outermost regions by enabling them to make the most of cohesion policy investment and financing for research and innovation;
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 17 a (new) – having regard to the communication from the Commission of 14 February 2018 on "A new, modern Multiannual Financial Framework for a European Union that delivers efficiently on its priorities post-2020" (COM(2018) 98)
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Believes that culture, education, youth and sport play a crucial role in promoting social cohesion, shaping the future of the European Union and have tremendous potential in terms of generating European added value and economic growth in all the EU regions, in particular within the framework of cohesion policy
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G a (new) Ga. whereas public investment in the EU is still below its pre-crisis level with major gaps in some of the countries most affected by the crisis as the public investment in the EU fell from 3.4 % of GDP in 2008 to 2.7 % in 2016;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Welcomes the contribution of Erasmus+ and Creative Europe to fostering mobility and cultural exchanges across the EU and with third countries; calls for better promotion and use of European tools for transparency, mobility and recognition of skills and qualifications, including those acquired through non-formal and informal learning; reaffirms that more mobility opportunities must be offered for people in vocational training, disadvantaged young people and people suffering from different and multiple forms of discrimination;
Amendment 300 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 32. Welcomes the establishment of a task force on subsidiarity and proportionality, and looks to this working group to make practical proposals to improve compliance with these principles in the context of cohesion policy; supports the objective of ensuring effective use of the subsidiarity and proportionality principles to enable and support genuine multilevel governance in this context, which requires appropriate empowerment both for local and regional authorities as well as for the Commission and the Member States in the form of genuine partnership;
Amendment 301 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 32. Welcomes the establishment of a task force on subsidiarity and proportionality, and looks to this working group to make practical proposals to improve compliance with these principles in the context of cohesion policy, on the basis of the closer involvement of all stakeholders, and to consolidate the vertical and horizontal partnerships in order to improve the way the strategy is implemented;
Amendment 302 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 32 32.
Amendment 303 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 Amendment 304 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Calls for requirements in respect of the programming, implementation and monitoring of ESI Funds in future to be based on the principle of differentiation, based on transparent and fair criteria, in accordance with the amounts allocated to programmes, the risk profile, the quality of administration and the level of financing by recipients;
Amendment 305 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Calls for requirements in respect of the programming, implementation and monitoring of ESI Funds in future to be based on the principle of
Amendment 306 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Calls for requirements in respect of the programming, implementation and monitoring of ESI Funds in future to be based on the principle of
Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 33 33. Calls for requirements in respect of the programming, implementation and monitoring of ESI Funds in future to be based on the principle of
Amendment 308 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Regards it as essential that the relationship between the Commission and managing authorities should evolve towards a ‘contract of confidence’; calls on the Commission to build on the work already done in the area of sound public finance management
Amendment 309 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Regards it as essential that the relationship between the Commission and managing authorities should evolve towards a ‘contract of confidence’; in this context reminds the importance of having and adequate and functioning MLG framework; calls on the Commission to build on the work already done in the area of sound public finance management, introducing the principle of a new label to reward managing authorities which have demonstrated their ability to comply with the rules; in relation to monitoring, calls for greater reliance on national and regional rules where their effectiveness has been verified and validated;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution Recital G b (new) Gb. whereas cohesion policy in the 2014-2020 programme plan supported 1.1 million SMEs, leading directly to the creation of a further 420,000 new jobs, helping more than 7.4 million unemployed people to find a job and helping in addition over 8.9 million people to gain new qualifications;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Urges that the selected projects should ideally complement each other and a greater synergy should be sought between the ESI funds and the financial instruments available (EBI, EFSI); stresses that the grants should not only aim at developing the infrastructure but also at creating “cultural clusters” grouping several related fields, such as cultural heritage, the cultural and creative industries, training programs, cultural tourism and local arts and crafts;
Amendment 310 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Regards it as essential that the relationship between the Commission and managing authorities should evolve towards a ‘contract of confidence’; calls on the Commission to build on the work already done in the area of sound public finance management, introducing the principle of a
Amendment 311 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 34. Regards it as essential that the relationship between the Commission and managing authorities should evolve towards a ‘contract of confidence’; calls on the Commission to build on the work already done in the area of sound public finance management, introducing the principle of a new label to reward managing authorities which have demonstrated their ability to comply with
Amendment 312 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 34 a (new) 34a. Underlines the importance of focusing on prevention of errors in the management and implementation of ESI funds; nevertheless considers that continuous efforts should be made in order that any irregularity attracts the obligation to pay or repay the amounts due or wrongly received;
Amendment 313 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 35. Calls for the single audit principle to be strengthened, the implementation of e-cohesion to be speeded up and the use of simplified and standardized costs to be adopted across the board;
Amendment 314 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 a (new) 35a. Calls on the Commission to put forward ideas for improving the response of cohesion policy to unforeseen events and reiterates in this context its call for a kind of reserve which would give the regions additional flexibility without jeopardising the long-term goals of operational programmes;
Amendment 315 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 a (new) 35a. Calls on the Commission to work with the Member States to develop training models for the various types of bodies, with a view to standardising and simplifying processes and making their implementation more effective;
Amendment 316 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 a (new) 35a. Reiterates importance of smart specialisation, both as an economic concept and a policy framework providing a novel avenue to pursue investment in longer-term growth potential in a context of rapid technological change and globalisation; stresses that technologies play an essential role in strengthening existing specialisations and revealing new economic opportunities in high-tech sectors, but also in traditional industries;
Amendment 317 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 35 b (new) 35b. Points out that culture plays an important role in job creation, social cohesion and the economic development of the EU, and that it is essential , therefore, to make more tailored incentives available, with a view to creating partnerships and fostering cultural mobility; points out that this is all the more important when it comes to the outermost regions and rural and remote regions;
Amendment 318 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Is concerned at the Commission’s recent statements concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude certain regions from the scope of cohesion policy; wishes to see a budget commensurate with
Amendment 319 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Is concerned at the Commission’s recent statements concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude certain regions from the scope of cohesion policy; wishes to see a budget commensurate with the challenges facing the regions, and calls for cohesion policy not to be made an adjustment variable; points out that the coverage of all EU regions is a ‘red line’ for the European Parliament;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph –1 (new) -1. Stresses that EU-15 financial contribution to cohesion policy is offset by direct and indirect export benefits, direct capital benefits as well as positive externalities;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Calls for steps to be taken, in the next programming period, to identify specific measures concerning and to set aside resources for physical infrastructure, such as incubators, digital infrastructure, such as broad band, and intangible infrastructure, for educational, cultural and research bodies, including in connection with measures to enhance energy efficiency;
Amendment 320 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Is concerned at the Commission’s recent statements concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude certain regions from the scope of cohesion policy; wishes to see a budget commensurate with the institutional goals of Cohesion Policy and with the challenges facing the regions, and calls for cohesion policy not to be made an adjustment variable; points out that the coverage of all EU regions is a ‘red line’ for the European Parliament;
Amendment 321 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 Amendment 322 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 36. Is concerned at the Commission’s recent statements concerning the cuts to the cohesion policy budget that might be made under the next MFF and which would exclude certain regions from the scope of cohesion policy; wishes to see an ambitious budget, commensurate with the challenges facing the regions, and calls for cohesion policy not to be made an adjustment variable; points out that the coverage of all EU regions is a ‘red line’ for the European Parliament; stresses that the theory of ‘economic development clubs’ confirms the importance of differentiated support for all European regions, including regions with a very high income, which must remain competitive with their global competitors;
Amendment 323 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 36 a (new) 36a. Points out that the coverage of all EU regions is a ‘red line’ for the European Parliament; stresses that the theory of ‘economic development clubs’ confirms the importance of differentiated support for all European regions and that, while adequate resources must still be set aside for less-developed regions, regions with a high income, which must remain competitive with their global competitors, must also still continue to receive support;
Amendment 324 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges,
Amendment 325 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges
Amendment 326 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection, with due regard for the sovereignty of the Member States; stresses, however, 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 its scope, which relates to medium and long-term social end economic development in the European Union;
Amendment 327 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection
Amendment 328 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges
Amendment 329 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as security or the integration of refugees under international protection
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph –1 a (new) -1a. Emphasises that cohesion policy brings economic benefits both to its recipients and to its main contributors across EU member states
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to step up their efforts to reduce the causes of growing educational and social inequality, with a particular emphasis on early school leavers, ongoing training for adults and apprenticeships and training to foster the social inclusion of migrants, in all areas of education and training, including through the provision of scholarships and support services;
Amendment 330 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as security or
Amendment 331 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 37. Considers that cohesion policy can help to meet new challenges, such as
Amendment 332 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 a (new) 37a. Stresses that a new post-2020 financing mechanism for the integration of migrants must be created and its scope revised in such a way as to fully reintegrate EU citizens who choose to return owing to instability or an economic or political crisis in the third country where they have been living;
Amendment 333 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 b (new) 37b. Stresses that a specific post-2020 financing mechanism must be created, within 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;
Amendment 334 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 37 c (new) 37c. Points out that although tourism creates wealth and social mobility opportunities, it still requires tailored investment programmes and policies to guarantee the sustainable development of communities and further social inclusion and cohesion;
Amendment 335 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 Amendment 336 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 38.
Amendment 337 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 38. Welcomes the largely positive results of the Juncker investment plan, which when implemented needs to invest in an even more transparent and targeted manner if it is to iron out regional inequalities; stresses that cohesion policy and the European Fund for
Amendment 338 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 38.
Amendment 339 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 38.
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph –1 b (new) -1b. Believes that cohesion policy is the glue that holds Europe together;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 6. Considers that post-2020 cohesion policy investments in culture and education should be more efficient and effective, in terms of both the quality and the quantity of the projects implemented and the provision of an adequate response to clearly identified local needs;
Amendment 340 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 38. Welcomes the positive results of the Juncker investment plan; stresses that cohesion policy and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) are complementary, but that one cannot be a substitute for the other, irrespective of the level of development of the regions; calls for establishing clear boundaries between the EFSI and Cohesion Policy together with clear opportunities for their combination;
Amendment 341 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 38.
Amendment 342 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 38 38. Welcomes the positive results of the
Amendment 343 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 39. Reiterates its commitment to long- term programming; considers that the only
Amendment 344 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 39. Reiterates its commitment to long- term programming; considers that the
Amendment 345 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 39 39.
Amendment 346 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 40. Calls for every effort to be made to avoid delays in programming for the new period; stresses the importance of submitting all documents relating to the future legal framework on time in all the official languages and of simplifying the formalities which managing authorities must complete before they can start the programming process (e.g. ex-ante conditionality, designation of the managing authority itself);
Amendment 347 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 40. Calls for every effort to be made to avoid delays in programming for the new period; stresses the importance of submitting all documents relating to the future legal framework on time in all the official languages, so as to ensure information that is as timely and accurate as possible for all concerned;
Amendment 348 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 40 a (new) 40a. Takes the view that any move to increase co-financing levels must take account of the problems which some Member States and regions in particular have in raising funds without placing a strain on national budgets; emphasises that any such increase must be covered by mechanisms for the netting of resources invested, excluding these from the calculation of the deficit for the purposes of the Stability and Growth Pact;
Amendment 349 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. Calls for measures to raise the public profile of cohesion policy; calls on the Commission to enhance the role of the managing authorities and of project promoters who employ innovative local communication methods to inform people about the use of the funds in the territories; emphasises the need to improve information and communication not only downstream (ESI Funds achievements), but also upstream (financing possibilities), particularly in relation to small project organisers; calls on the Commission and Member States to establish mechanisms and broad institutionalised platforms for cooperation in order to ensure better visibility and awareness-raising;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph –1 c (new) -1c. Notes that the 7th Cohesion report clearly presents the outcome of cohesion policy in terms of growth, jobs, transport, energy, environment, education and training;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Emphasises that cohesion policy can also support the conversion or economic revitalisation of certain territories, in particular urban centres, through investment in creative industries such as design, and that investments of this kind have borne fruit in a number of European cities, including Nantes, Kortrijk or Arnhem;
Amendment 350 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. Calls for measures to
Amendment 351 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. Calls for measures to raise the public profile of cohesion policy; calls on the Commission to enhance the role of the managing authorities and of project promoters who employ innovative local communication methods to inform people about the results of the use of the funds in the territories; emphasises the need to improve information and communication not only downstream (ESI Funds achievements), but
Amendment 352 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 41. Calls for measures to raise the public profile of cohesion policy; calls on the Commission to enhance the role of the managing authorities and of project promoters who employ innovative local communication methods to inform people about the use of the funds in the territories; emphasises the need to improve information and communication not only downstream (ESI Funds achievements), but also upstream (financing possibilities), particularly in relation to small project organisers;
Amendment 353 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 41 a (new) 41a. Stresses the advantages of cohesion policy externalisation in highlighting the benefits of investment in less developed regions by Member States that are net contributors;
Amendment 354 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 Amendment 355 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 42. Notes that some European regions as well as cohesion policy as such are particularly exposed to the impact of Brexit; stresses that the future cohesion policy must minimise the negative impact of Brexit on the other European regions, and calls for detailed consideration to be given to the possibility of continuing partnerships in the context of territorial cooperation;
Amendment 356 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 42 a (new) 42a. Calls on the Commission to make it possible to and encourage the Member States to train specialised teams for the creation and financing of European projects;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph –1 d (new) -1d. Notes that both cohesion policy and Horizon 2020 are equally important and complementary in supporting research and innovation;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States, in the light of the significant successes achieved by the network of European regions, which has included culture and the cultural and creative industries in the smart specialisation strands of their operational programmes, to continue and step up these policies;
Amendment 37 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph –1 e (new) -1e. Notes that cohesion policy played a substantial role in recovery of EU economy by mobilising economic activities during the crisis and therefore enabling all UE regions to meet difficult targets in all cross cutting policies;
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 a (new) 6 a. Notes that cross-border cooperation, a major EU policy objective, has helped to mitigate the adverse effects of internal borders and can lead to improvements in cross-border achievements in education and culture; believes this is especially important in EU border regions;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6 b. Reminds the Commission of the need to promote the right to high quality inclusive education and training for all ages and types of learners, invest in outreach and provide support for the most vulnerable learners and disadvantaged individuals, such as learners with disabilities, NEETs, and young people and children with migrant backgrounds, and ensure their systematic inclusion in mainstream education;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to support knowledge partnerships between universities, educational, professional and research bodies and cultural institutes in an effort to meet the growing need for new skills and for retraining in the cultural and creative sector;
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 18 a (new) – having regard to the Communication from the Commission of 14 February 2018 on A new, modern Multiannual Financial Framework for a European Union that delivers efficiently on its priorities post-2020 (COM(2018)98),
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Recalls that importance of culture and cultural heritage also with regard to the economic prosperity of cities and regions and therefore calls on the Member States to adopt all the necessary measures to effectively safeguard the tangible and intangible cultural heritage and to use in this regard all the available tools of the cohesion policy;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions, while focusing on the less developed ones, and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument,
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 6 b (new) 6b. Emphasises that cohesion policy can also support retraining or professional training policies in the cultural and creative industries, in which innovation and change are constant;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument, with a budget commensurate with the
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Asks the Commission to include in the future regulation on the cohesion policy quality indicators for
Amendment 42 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main public investment instrument, with a budget no lower than the budget for the period 2014-2020 and commensurate with the existing needs and challenges;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 7. Asks the Commission to include in the future regulation on the cohesion policy quality indicators for culture-related investments, as also required by Parliament’s resolution of 8 September 2015 entitled ‘Towards an integrated approach to cultural heritage for Europe’
Amendment 43 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions, regardless of their level of development, and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument in the future programming period, with a budget commensurate with the challenges;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7 a. Calls on the Commission to establish the cultural and creative industries (CCIs) as a horizontal priority and to use effectively the funding available under EU programmes and the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs) in order to support more projects in the CCI sector;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument, with a budget which is commensurate with the challenges and at least equal to the current budget;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Calls for greater theoretical and practical scope to offered for medium- and long-term projects in the cultural, audiovisual and creative sphere, by making provision for the combined use of the Structural Funds and the EFSI;
Amendment 45 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to cover all European regions and remain the European Union’s main investment instrument, with an ambitious budget, commensurate with the challenges;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7 b. Underlines that regions have a proved capacity in developing clusters and cross-border cooperation in the field of CCIs, and in this context notes the positive effects of smart specialisation in CCI as a motor of growth for regions;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 1. Considers it crucial that cohesion policy should continue to adequately cover all
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 b (new) 7b. Calls for cohesion policy measures to place greater emphasis on investment in the cultural and education sectors, in particular in urban and outlying areas, through the use of retraining and inclusion tools;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 1 a (new) 1a. Underlines that budgetary appropriations for cohesion policy post- 2020 for the EU-27 have to be ensured at least at the level of the 2014-2020 budget at constant prices;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 c (new) 7 c. Calls on the Commission to exploit the capacity of the European Regional Development Fund to support the development of sport infrastructure and promote sustainable sport and outdoor activities as a tool for regional and rural development, and the European Social Fund to strengthen the skills and employability of workers in the sport sector;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities; takes the view that divergent practices in this area may run counter to the objective of cohesion and are liable to cause further problems for regions that are falling behind or are the most vulnerable to globalisation; considers that cohesion policy could contribute to the promotion of social and fiscal convergence by providing incentives; calls on the Commission to take better account of this aspect in the European Semester;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 c (new) 7c. Urges the Member States to set aside a share of cohesion policy funding for high-quality cultural and education projects which, although suitable, do not receive EU support owing to a lack of funding;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 7 d (new) 7d. Calls on the Member States to support these integrated territorial cultural projects, such as cultural itineraries, which foster high-quality territorial development, and public-private partnerships in the area of cultural tourism;
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 18 a (new) – having regard to the Commission Staff Working document of 10 April 2017 on “Competitiveness in low-income and low-growth regions: the Lagging Regions report” SWD (2017) 132,
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Stresses the importance of equality of opportunity for persons that may be physically or geographically disadvantaged to ensure they have equal access to both culture and education;
Amendment 50 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods
Amendment 52 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities; emphasises the notable spill- over effects of ESI Funds investments across the Single Market;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments
Amendment 54 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods (such as growth, social inclusion, innovation and environmental protection) and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods
Amendment 56 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and t
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities and the backwardness of the less favoured regions;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities towards the upward adaptation of living standards;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and to the Treaty objective of reducing disparities, as well as for combating growing inequalities;
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution Citation 31 a (new) – having regard its resolution of 13 March 2018 on "lagging regions in the EU";
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Underlines that investments in culture, education, youth and sport significantly improve social cohesion in the European Union, especially by facilitating social integration of European citizens;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to European public goods and priorities and to the Treaty objective of reducing regional disparities;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 2 2. Emphasises that cohesion policy investments provide European added value by contributing to
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates its commitment to shared management and the principles of partnership and subsidiarity, which
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates its commitment to shared management and the principles of partnership and subsidiarity, and especially Multi Level Governance (MLG), which contributes substantially to the added value generated by cohesion policy; stresses that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take account of the needs and specificities of each territory and to bring the European Union closer to its citizens;
Amendment 65 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates its commitment to shared
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates its commitment to shared management and the principles of partnership and subsidiarity, which contribute to the added value generated by cohesion policy; stresses that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take into account
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates its commitment to shared
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates its commitment to shared management and the principles of partnership and subsidiarity, which contribute to the added value generated by cohesion policy; stresses that the added value of this policy stems primarily from its ability to take account of the needs and specificities of
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates its commitment to shared management and the principles of partnership and subsidiarity, which
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas cohesion policy
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1 b. Recognises the importance of safeguarding both natural and cultural heritage and harnessing their potential as an economic driver;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 3. Reiterates its
Amendment 71 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 3 a (new) 3a. Considers that the partnership principle should be strengthened by establishing binding minimum standards for partnership involvement from the outset of programming;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises that European added value is also reflected in European territorial cooperation, in all its dimensions; calls for an increase in its share of the budget allocated to cohesion policy, while improving coordination between different programmes
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises that European added value is also reflected in European territorial cooperation (ETC), in all its dimensions; calls for an increase in its share of the budget allocated to cohesion policy
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises that European added value is also reflected in European territorial cooperation, in all its dimensions; calls for an increase in its share of the budget allocated to cohesion policy, while improving coordination between different programmes to avoid overlaps and enhancing possibilities to adapt support measures in view of addressing particular challenges of regions;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises that European added value is also reflected in European territorial cooperation, in all its dimensions; calls for an increase in its share of the budget allocated to cohesion policy, while improving coordination between different programmes to avoid overlaps; reminds the importance of macroregional strategies in the achievement of the cohesion policy objectives;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises that European added value is also reflected in European territorial cooperation, in all its dimensions; calls for an increase in its share of the budget allocated to cohesion policy,
Amendment 77 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises that European added value is
Amendment 78 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises th
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 4. Emphasises that European added value is also reflected in European territorial cooperation, in all its dimensions; calls for
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious development of the whole Union, leading to a strengthening of
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Regrets that the Commission’s 7th report on economic, social and territorial cohesion does not make any quantitative or qualitative reference to culture-related projects, which accounted for EUR
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Notes that the implementation of cohesion policy in a region can generate spill-over benefits elsewhere in the EU due to the increased trade generated; points out, however, that these benefits vary considerably from one Member State to the other, depending in particular on geographic proximity and the structure of the Member States’ economies;
Amendment 81 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 4 a (new) 4a. Underlines the need to develop a “Cost of non-Cohesion Policy” methodology in order to provide additional quantifiable evidence on the European Added Value of Cohesion Policy, following the example of the work done by the European Parliament on the "cost of the non-Europe";
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 5. Notes that cities, towns and urban areas combine opportunities and challenges, because of the concentration
Amendment 84 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Expresses its concern on the findings of the 7th Report, which highlights that, despite positive signs, the risk of poverty or social exclusion remains a key challenge especially in the Baltic and southern Member States and that inequalities are growing especially in cities;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 5 a (new) 5a. Emphasises that European territorial cooperation adds substantial added value to realise EU objectives and encourages solidarity between European regions and its neighbours;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Emphasises that efforts to consolidate the territorial dimension of cohesion policy require greater attention to be paid to peri-urban and rural problems, with a particular focus on to medium-sized towns; recognises that municipalities have the expertise necessary to coordinate major projects involving partnerships for developing urban-rural joint cooperation initiatives;
Amendment 87 #
6. Emphasises that efforts to consolidate the territorial dimension of cohesion policy require greater attention to be paid to peri-urban and rural problems, with a particular focus on to medium-sized towns of each Member State;
Amendment 88 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 6 6. Emphasises that efforts to consolidate the territorial dimension of cohesion policy require greater attention to be paid to peri-urban, cross border and rural problems, with a particular focus on to medium-sized towns;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, improving transport connectivity with particular emphasis on public transport and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help them meet the challenges they face: rural de
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution Recital A A. whereas cohesion policy aims to promote harmonious development of the whole Union, leading to a strengthening of its economic, social and territorial cohesion, in a spirit of solidarity and with the aim of promoting growth, and reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured regions;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Regrets that the Commission’s 7th report on economic, social and territorial cohesion does not make any quantitative or qualitative reference to culture-related projects, which accounted for at least EUR
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, improving transport connectivity and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help them meet the challenges they face: rural desertification, the destruction of city- centre communities, areas without health care, etc.; highlights that ensuring high- speed Internet connection in remote rural areas can greatly lessen their backwardness and improve their competitiveness;
Amendment 91 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, improving
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, improving transport connectivity and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help them meet the challenges they face: rural desertification, the destruction of city- centre communities, social exclusion, lack of work and affordable housing, areas without health care, etc.;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, improving
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential and supporting projects which boost local economies, improving their transport connectivity and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help them meet the challenges they face: rural desertification, the destruction of city-
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, encouraging investments in improving transport connectivity and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 7. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas in all their diversity, by valuing their potential, improving transport connectivity and very high-speed broadband and providing support to help them meet the challenges they face: rural desertification, the destruction of city- centre communities, the need to ensure access routes, areas without health care, etc.;
Amendment 97 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 7 a (new) 7a. Calls on the Commission to make cohesion policy more flexible so that it can provide a response to the ongoing rural exodus in a number of Member States; calls, in that connection, for programmes to be created specifically for rural and less populated areas and the outermost regions, with a view, in particular, to promoting employment and the establishment of small and medium-sized enterprises;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for greater account to be taken of certain specific territorial characteristics
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution Paragraph 8 8. Calls for greater account to be
source: 618.191
2018/03/01
EMPL
84 amendments...
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion Recital A A.
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the employment rate in the EU has been growing for four consecutive years and now surpasses the 2008 figure at 71%, but still remains below the pre-crisis level in
Amendment 11 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the employment rate in the EU
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the employment rate in the EU has been growing for four consecutive years and now surpasses the 2008 figure, but still remains below the pre-crisis level in half of the Member States; whereas regional disparities have started to narrow but remain high in some Member States;
Amendment 13 #
Draft opinion Recital B a (new) B a. whereas part-time work has increased 11% compared to 2008, and full-time employment has dropped by 2% in the same period, while involuntary part-time work still represents almost one- third of this type of contracts; whereas labour market segmentation between permanent and atypical jobs remains worrying, with countries showing a percentage of temporary contracts ranging from 10% to 20%, with particularly low transition rates towards permanent contracts and temporary jobs representing "dead ends" rather than "stepping stones" towards permanent jobs; whereas this phenomenon is impeding large numbers of workers to benefit from secure, relatively well-paid employment and good prospects, creating a wage gap between permanent and temporary workers; whereas labour market segmentation worsen due to many EU countries adopting two-tier reforms in employment protection legislation, easing the use of temporary contracts.
Amendment 14 #
Draft opinion Recital B a (new) B a. whereas shrinking employment disparities followed by shrinking disparities in GDP per head are evident at regional level across the EU;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion Recital B b (new) B b. whereas gender employment gap still remains above 10pps, scoring 11.6 % for the EU, with a 76.9% employment rate for men and 65.3% for women, and even wider gaps among non-EU born and Roma women;
Amendment 16 #
Draft opinion Recital B c (new) B c. whereas increasing in-work poverty remains in Europe as a whole, with highest levels recorded in Spain (13.1%), Greece (14%) and Romania (18.6%), showing that employment alone is not always sufficient to lift people out of poverty and reflecting different labour market patterns, including part-time and/or temporary jobs, wage levels, and work intensity in the households and poor working conditions;
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion Recital C C. whereas while the risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU has fallen back to its pre-crisis level, it remains very high and far from reaching the Europe 2020 poverty and social exclusion target; whereas, according to the Commission publication ‘Employment and Social Developments in Europe 2017’, in 2015 there were 118,8 million people at risk of poverty or social exclusion (AROPE), 1,7 million above the 2008 level and far from the Europe 2020 Strategy target of reducing AROPE by 20 million, with wide disparities between Member States ranging from 5% or less in the Czech Republic or Germany to around 20 % in Greece and Spain; whereas children AROPE rate (0-17) in 2016 is 26,4%, higher than 24,2% of adult people (16-64) and almost 10pps higher than AROPE rate of 18,3% for elder people (65+); whereas, the number of children experiencing poverty remains alarmingly high in Europe, currently standing at more than 25 million and whereas the impact of poverty on children can last a lifetime and perpetuates the intergenerational transmission of disadvantage;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion Recital C C. whereas
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion Recital C C. whereas while the risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU has fallen back to its pre-crisis level, it remains very high and far from reaching the Europe 2020 poverty and social exclusion target; whereas the whole EU has subscribed to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, with one of these goals being to end poverty in all its forms everywhere;
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas unemployment and youth unemployment in the Union have been falling gradually since 2013, but are still above 2008 levels, with considerable differences among and within the Member States; whereas regional disparities have started to narrow; whereas the vary on unemployment rates is still relevant, ranging from around 4% in Germany to almost 20% in Spain and 23.6% in Greece; whereas hidden unemployment was at 20% in 2016 (unemployed, willing to work but not actively searching for employment)
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion Recital C C. whereas
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion Recital C C. whereas while the risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU has fallen back to its pre-crisis level, it remains very high including in more developed regions and far from reaching the Europe 2020 poverty and social exclusion target;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion Recital C C. whereas
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion Recital C C. whereas while the risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU has fallen back to its pre-crisis level, it remains
Amendment 24 #
Draft opinion Recital C a (new) C a. whereas gross disposable household income (GDHI) per capita has still not recovered in several Member States from its pre-crisis levels, several of them recording levels from 20 to 30pps lower than in 2008; whereas income inequalities increases have not been reversed from the onset of the crisis in several Member States, and in some cases even have worsened; whereas in the EU as a whole the richest 20% of households received an income share that is 5.1 times that of the poorest 20%, with ratios of 6.5 or above in some Eastern and Southern European countries, almost twice as high as values for some Centre Europeans and Nordic best performers countries;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion Recital C a (new) C a. whereas the main objective of cohesion policy is strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion by reducing regional disparities both within and between Member States, improving the well-being of EU citizens and providing them with equal opportunities regardless of their place of residence;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion Recital C a (new) C a. whereas differences in unemployment and income across the EU encourage people to move to find better opportunities; whereas unbalanced and rapid change in population associated with brain drain creates complications for mostly rural regions in the EU13.
Amendment 27 #
Draft opinion Recital C a (new) C a. Whereas infra-regional disparities are growing, including in more prosperous regions which contain pockets of poverty; whereas most prosperous regions allow driving effects in favor of growth;
Amendment 28 #
Draft opinion Recital C a (new) C a. whereas a concrete positive impact of the cohesion policy investments funds cannot be achieved without a more effective involvement of all partners at national, regional and local level;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion Recital C a (new) C a. Whereas there is a need for the Commission and the Member States to reach a stronger commitment to applying Article 174 and 175 of the TFEU
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas unemployment and youth unemployment in the Union have been falling gradually since 2013, but are still above 2008 levels, with considerable differences among and within the Member States, especially in the EU member states most affected by the financial crisis;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion Recital C b (new) C b. whereas policies to reconcile the work-life balance are of paramount importance in removing single parents and families from poverty and combating the worrying phenomena of the falling birth rate and ageing population;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion Recital C b (new) C b. Whereas Cohesion policy has played an important role in tackling the financial, economic and social crisis of the past years by providing much-needed opportunities for public investment;
Amendment 32 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1.
Amendment 33 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Is of the opinion that Cohesion Policy, as the main investment policy of the Union, should be maintained at at least a similar budgetary level in the future multiannual financial framework; considers that the European Social Fund (ESF) should be retained as the main EU instrument for the integration and reintegration of workers into the labour market as well as for supporting measures for social inclusion, combating poverty and inequalities, and the creation of equal opportunities, with a continued 20% earmarked funding for the fight against poverty and social exclusion; considers therefore that the ESF share should be increased so that at least 30% of the combined ESI funds resources at EU level should be allocated to the ESF in each Member State;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Is of the opinion that Cohesion Policy, as the main investment policy of the Union, should be maintained at at least a similar budgetary level in the future multiannual financial framework; considers that the European Social Fund (ESF) should be retained as the main EU instrument for the integration and reintegration of workers into the labour market as well as for supporting measures for social inclusion, combating poverty and inequalities; defends the consideration of social criteria for the allocation of funds, in particular the unemployment rate and the youth unemployment rate, in addition to GDP per capita;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Is of the opinion that Cohesion Policy, as the main public investment policy of the Union, should be maintained at at least a similar budgetary level in the future multiannual financial framework; considers that the European Social Fund (ESF) should be retained as the main EU instrument for social cohesion and the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights, including the integration and reintegration of workers into the labour market as well as for supporting measures for social inclusion, combating poverty and inequalities;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Is of the opinion that Cohesion Policy,
Amendment 37 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 1. Is of the opinion that Cohesion Policy, as the main investment policy of the Union, should be maintained at at least a
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Recalls that public investment in the EU is still below pre-crisis levels, making regions and Member States in need for more support to take up the current and future challenges; believes that given the growing social divergences across the EU, the social investment approach must be put at the centre of a coherent policy framework aligning the EU governance framework and its budget with the social investment imperative; stresses that these types of investment with long-term return are key to the future competitiveness of EU regions.
Amendment 39 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Takes note of the data provided in the 7th Cohesion report showing signs of general improvement in the social situation, but also for remaining social divergences among Member States, aggravated as a result of the harmful impact of the economic crisis and years of austerity measures; observes with concern that despite positive signs, the risk of poverty or social exclusion remains a key challenge, being one of the main challenges to social cohesion together with an increase in inequalities in many Member States;
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas unemployment and youth unemployment in the Union have been falling gradually since 2013, but are still slightly above 2008 levels
Amendment 40 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. demands the creation of a comparable regionally adjusted indicatorsystem, through which the status quo and the desired condition along the fourjustice dimensions (distribution justice, procedural justice, equalopportunities and intergenerational justice) can be measured. If the status quoand the desired state diverge from one another, nations and regions should havethe opportunity to take appropriate measures, in order to eradicate this discrepancy;
Amendment 41 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. Considers that binding cohesion policy programming to quantifiable Europe 2020 targets, such as the reduction of poverty, was one of the main achievements of the 2014-2020 programming period; believes that contributing to economic, social and territorial cohesion in the EU should be the main objective of a Europe post-2020 strategy, based on the adopted international Sustainable Development Goals;
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 a (new) 1 a. States the reinforcement of EU budget, based on contributions that takes into account the Gross National Income of the Member States, aiming at public investment that supports national productive sectors, contributing to the reduction of multiple structural dependencies, promoting employment with rights, quality public services and the full use of Member-States' global potential;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1 b. States that some of the more relevant employment and social imbalances and social divergences in Europe, as labour market segmentation, wage dispersion or child poverty, have not been resolved but have worsened, evidencing that public policies at the national level and European mechanisms are insufficient for building a stronger social cohesion and a fairer European labour market; highlights that stronger and wider policies at European level are needed to complement current national efforts; stresses that fiscal flexibility to support social investment in social rights is vital as well as mainstreaming all principles enshrined in the European Pillar of Social Rights effectively at all stages.
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1 b. Is of the opinion that cohesion policy and particularly ESF have contributed to reaching certain level of recovery by Member States and regions corresponding to the pre-crisis situation, however, the share of ESF from the next cohesion envelope and the share from the ESF for combating poverty and social exclusion should be increased for further reduction of disparities and inequalities, and for achieving the Europe 2020 targets for inclusive growth;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 b (new) 1 b. stresses the importance of the compatibility of family and career in the economic advancement and cohesion of all regions;
Amendment 46 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 c (new) 1 c. Is of the opinion that the Social Progress Index should be evaluated and considered as an additional indicator to complement the GDP indicator for allocation of ESIF, given that increase in GDP per head does not correspond to the same extent of increase in employment for all regions, and is not sufficient itself for measuring the new types of inequalities between EU regions, and that the economic growth does not impact on certain determinants of social progress as, for example, access to education, and that there are other important factors which determinate inclusion and social progress;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 c (new) 1 c. Recalls that inequalities threaten the future of the European project, erode its legitimacy and can damage trust in the EU as an engine of social progress and that the reduction of inequalities must be one of the main priorities at the European level, as recently stated by the Parliament; considers essential to improve the process of policy coordination in order to better monitor, prevent and correct negative trends that could increase inequalities and weaken social progress and social cohesion or negatively affect social justice, putting in place preventive and corrective measures when necessary;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 1 d (new) 1 d. highlights that the social dimension of EU policies has become a priority with the proclamation of the Pillar of Social Rights, agreed in part as a response to the harmful impact of the economic crisis and years of austerity measures which have aggravated social divergences across Europe; considers the creation of the European Pillar of Social Rights as a positive step towards a more social Europe; warns that social and employment policies at national, regional and local level need to be supported with sound EU cohesion funding for all EU regions.
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2.
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion Recital A A. whereas unemployment and youth unemployment in the
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 2. Regrets the sluggish implementation of the 2014-2020 programmes with just 39% of the total funding allocated as at July 20173a; considers that faster implementation, a smoother transition between programming periods, clear targets, benchmarks and result indicators, genuine simplification and capacity development are necessary; _________________ 3a http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/source s/docoffic/official/reports/cohesion7/7cr.p df, p. 175
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. believes that before linking social funding to policy priorities agreed with Member states in the European Semester, regional authorities must be involved and changes into the indicators for social progress in cohesion policy must be introduced; stresses that Country Reports and Country Specific Recommendations cannot become the only reference documents for programming EU investments on the ground, especially social investment.
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Calls on the Commission to introduce policies designed to combat demographic decline and the dispersion of the population; stresses that the European Union’s cohesion policy should prioritise attention for regions suffering demographic decline; Therefore, calls for strategic investment, in particular broadband access, with a view to making them more competitive, improving industry and territorial structure
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Recalls that the principle of proportionality must prevail in the management and control of cohesion programs; calls on the Commission and the Member States to explore the possibilities of an online system of application more conducive to administrative simplification for project managers;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Calls the Commission not to consider in the calculation of the public spending deficit the co-financing of EU programs for the purpose of complying with the Maastricht criteria, thus facilitating negotiations and improving the implementation of these programs;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 2 a (new) 2 a. Stresses that of the numerous challenges the European regions will face in the coming years, social inclusion and poverty as well as rising inequalities, both between and within regions as well as among citizens, are of particular relevance to cohesion policy;
Amendment 57 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes the view that the job creation potential of Union funds is still insufficient and should therefore be further strengthened through more efficient and results-based policy-making and implementation focusing in particular on future-oriented sectors with a net quality job creation potential, in particular the green and circular economy, care sector and digital sector; considers, moreover, that access to funding should be eased for all beneficiaries, especially social economy actors and SMEs;
Amendment 58 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes the view that the job creation potential of Union funds is still insufficient and should therefore be further strengthened through more efficient and results-based policy-making and implementation; considers, moreover, that access to funding should be eased for all beneficiaries, especially SMEs, NGOs and smaller municipalities;
Amendment 59 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes the view that the job creation potential of Union funds is still insufficient and should therefore be further strengthened through more efficient and results-based policy-making and implementation; considers, moreover, that access to funding should be eased for all beneficiaries, especially SMEs and self- employed;
Amendment 6 #
Draft opinion Recital A a (new) A a. whereas long-term unemployment remains, sharing above 50% of total unemployment in some Member States and represents 45,6% in the EU and 49,7% in the EA; whereas unemployment rate only tracks individuals who do not have a job and have actively looked for work in the last 4 weeks and long term unemployment rate only measures the share of the economically active population aged 15 to 74 who has been unemployed for 12 months or more
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes the view that the job creation potential of Union funds is still insufficiently leveraged and should therefore be further strengthened through more efficient and results-based policy- making and implementation; considers, moreover, that access to funding should be eased for all beneficiaries, especially SMEs;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes the view that the job creation potential of EU
Amendment 62 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 3. Takes the view that the job creation potential of Union funds is still insufficient and should therefore be further strengthened through more efficient and results-based policy-making and implementation; considers, moreover, that access to funding should be eased for all beneficiaries
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. considers that it is essential, in the framework of the discussions for the new MFF, to carry out a reflection around the EU cohesion policy and how effective is to be a driver for social progress and deliver on the EU's social objectives; points out that despite the intensified efforts of the EU to align cohesion policy with social objectives, strong socio-economic disparities still remain across Europe and new geographical divides are appearing across the EU, accelerated by the economic crisis; believes that inclusion and social progress, can only be achieved through well-balanced redistributive policies; calls on the Commission and the Member States to reconsider whether GDP per capita is really the right criteria to determine where and how EU funding should be allocated or if other types of criteria and indicators need to be incorporated.
Amendment 64 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 a (new) 3 a. Calls on the Member States to invest more in skills that improve economic growth by narrowing the skills gap and reducing child poverty and social exclusion; calls on the Member States to pay increased attention to the rural regions which have not sufficiently benefited from the economic growth.
Amendment 65 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3 b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to incorporate new indicators to measure social convergence, including the Social Progress Index which aims to measure the multiple dimensions of social progress while helping regions identify the main issues they are confronted with.
Amendment 66 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 b (new) 3 b. Calls on Member States to start or continue structural reforms to improve competition, business environment and skills potential, particularly in the Member States with low productivity levels;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 c (new) 3 c. Calls on the Commission to also use new indicators in the social scoreboard to get a fine and precise overview of the social situation in each region and as a determinant for the allocation of EU funding to thematic objectives with a social dimension; considers that in the state of ex post evaluation, social indicators should also be used as a tool to assess the success of EU funding in achieving better social outcomes and that adapting a criteria of distribution to the set of objectives is therefore essential to give more prominence to social developments in EU cohesion policy.
Amendment 68 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 3 c (new) 3 c. Insists that transparent public procurement is essential to promote development and fair competition; takes the view that public procurement is best suited to fostering socially and environmentally beneficial effects of investments.
Amendment 69 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion Recital A a (new) A a. whereas in the current financial period, cohesion policy is expected to help support 1.1 million SMEs, 7.4 million unemployed people find a job, 8.9 million people gain new qualifications, invest €16 billion in the digital economy and make substantial investments in social infrastructure;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue initiatives aimed at increasing access to
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue initiatives aimed at increasing access to better education,
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue initiatives aimed at increasing access to better education, skills, and quality, sustainable employment, especially for young people; points out that training programmes financed under the ESF should be tailored to the needs of the
Amendment 73 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue initiatives aimed at increasing access to better education, skills, and quality, innovative entrepreneurship, and sustainable employment, especially for young people; points out that training programmes financed under the ESF should be tailored to the needs of the labour market;
Amendment 74 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 4. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue initiatives aimed at increasing access to better and inclusive education, skills, and quality, sustainable employment, especially for young people; points out that training programmes financed under the ESF should be tailored to the needs of the labour market;
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. Reiterates its concern about the rising trend towards underemployment and hidden unemployment, the chronification of long term unemployment and the level of youth unemployment and long-term unemployment; recalls the importance of investment in plans prioritising the reduction of long term unemployment combining vocational training with personalised guidance
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. Calls for the strengthening of budget lines that promote effective responses to the reception and social inclusion of refugees and migrants; rejects all budgetary and political measures that promote the externalization of EU borders, such as FRONTEX, or the recent arms' race and militarization of international relations measures proposed by the EU;
Amendment 77 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. Calls the Commission to pay particular attention to the important relationship between the cohesion policy and the most geographically and demographically disadvantaged areas, suffering from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps, such as islands and mountain regions;
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. Considers Council's recommendation of 2016 on "Upskilling Pathways" together with Member States' response and follow-up crucial to improving skills of EU adult population and increasing participation in lifelong learning by lower-qualified adults.
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. Underlines that social and fiscal convergence contribute to the cohesion objective and that divergent practices in this area are liable to cause further problems for territories most vulnerable to globalisation;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the employment rate in the EU has been growing for four consecutive years and now surpasses the 2008 figure, but still remains below the pre-crisis level in half of the Member States; whereas regional disparities have started to narrow; whereas, employment rates diverge widely, ranging from much below the EU average of 65% in Greece, Croatia, Italy and Spain, to higher than 75% in the Netherlands, Denmark, United Kingdom, Germany and Sweden; whereas employment measured in terms of hours worked per employee remains 3% below the pre-crisis level in the EU and 4% in the Euro Area due to increases in part- time work and reductions in the hours worked by full-time employees; whereas young people are more often employed under non-standard and atypical forms of employment, including temporary jobs, involuntary part-time work and lower wage jobs
Amendment 80 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. stresses the necessity of retaining school and educational institutions close to one’s own residence and demands a nationwide policy of retention of those, if possible supported by the European structural funds;
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 4 a (new) 4 a. underlines that combating poverty and social exclusion should be a top priority for EU and its Member States; considers that all EU funds should contribute to the implementation of this priority;
Amendment 82 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Calls on the Commission and Member States to reinforce the partnership with social partners and civil society at all levels and in all stages of the process, including in the preparation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of the programmes, to ensure a successful implementation of cohesion policy and the ESF in particular, in the future; calls to this end for sufficient resources and technical assistance to be made available for all relevant partners to effectively participate in the process;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 a (new) 5 a. Rejects the imposition of any conditionality to the implementation of EU cohesion funds by Member States; states that cohesion funds must take into account Member States' strategic development perspectives, both inside of their own borders or in a transnational perspective;
Amendment 84 #
Draft opinion Paragraph 5 b (new) 5 b. Stresses that to effectively tackle social problems, such as combating poverty and social exclusion within communities, a bottom-up approach is needed as these issues require a tailor- made response and the active involvement of the level of government directly concerned;
Amendment 9 #
Draft opinion Recital B B. whereas the employment rate in the EU has been growing for four consecutive years and now surpasses the 2008 figure, but still remains below the pre-crisis level in half of the Member States; whereas
source: 619.046
|
History
(these mark the time of scraping, not the official date of the change)
events/3/docs |
|
committees/0/shadows/3 |
|
committees/1/rapporteur |
|
docs/1/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE616.856New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/REGI-PR-616856_EN.html |
docs/2/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE618.191New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/REGI-AM-618191_EN.html |
docs/3/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE616.606&secondRef=03New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CULT-AD-616606_EN.html |
docs/4/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE616.664&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/BUDG-AD-616664_EN.html |
docs/5/docs/0/url |
Old
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=COMPARL&mode=XML&language=EN&reference=PE617.994&secondRef=02New
https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/EMPL-AD-617994_EN.html |
events/0/type |
Old
Committee referral announced in Parliament, 1st reading/single readingNew
Committee referral announced in Parliament |
events/1/type |
Old
Vote in committee, 1st reading/single readingNew
Vote in committee |
events/2 |
|
events/2 |
|
events/3/docs |
|
events/5 |
|
events/5 |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
procedure/Other legal basis |
Rules of Procedure EP 159
|
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=ENNew
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-2018-0105New
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/TA-8-2018-0105_EN.html |
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
activities |
|
commission |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/0 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/1 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/2 |
|
committees/3 |
|
committees/3 |
|
docs |
|
events |
|
links |
|
other |
|
procedure/Modified legal basis |
Old
Rules of Procedure EP 150New
Rules of Procedure EP 159 |
procedure/dossier_of_the_committee |
Old
REGI/8/11512New
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 54
|
procedure/legal_basis/0 |
Rules of Procedure EP 52
|
procedure/subject |
Old
New
|
activities/0 |
|
activities/1 |
|
activities/2 |
|
activities/3 |
|