8 Amendments of Andrey NOVAKOV related to 2017/2285(INI)
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 24 a (new)
Citation 24 a (new)
– having regard to the Communication from the commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions A credible enlargement perspective for and enhanced EU engagement with the Western Balkans COM(2018) 65 final,
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas in the 2007-2013 period, EUR 81 billion, or almost one third (31 %) of the ESIF Funds was invested in transport infrastructure,; which had a clear impact on GDP, business creation, industry, employment, exports and tourism; whereas the strongest positive impact of EU transport infrastructure investment was recordedis particularly visible in Eastern Europe and, more particularspecifically, in the new EU Member States, to which 69 % of the total transport funding was allocated;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas success stories of road, rail and port projects backed by the EU budget contribute to economy, growth, industry, export, tourism, trade, creation of jobs, revival of regions and reversal of depopulation trends; whereas there are examples of EU added value such as: the modernisation of railway line E30/C-E30, Kraków – Rzeszow in Poland or Sofia- Plovdiv railway in Bulgaria; Leipzig City Rail Tunnel (Modules 5 and 6) in Germany or the track modernisation Votice to Benešov u Prahy in the Czech Republic; Reconstruction of Ülemiste Junction in Tallinn, Estonia or the rehabilitation of national road DN6Alexandria – Craiova in Romania; Madrid-Valencia-Murcia High Speed Rail in Spain or the completion of Trakia motorway from Sofia to the Black Sea port of Burgas; Budapest Metro Line 4 in Hungary or Sofia Metro Lines in Bulgaria and many others;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes that the intervention logic behind EU transport infrastructure investment should remain a well-balanced construction of centrally managed and shared management sources in order to address policy and funding needs; recalls that the CEF aims to address centrally the EU-wide priority of core TEN-T corridors, including safety and environmental aspects; recalls also that the ERDF and CF have a strong regional dimension that responds to local demand (urban and peri- urban areas) and they support the connectivity to TEN-T and mobility through secondary and tertiary nodes and multimodal terminals (comprehensive TEN-T network); underlines, in this context, that the relevant budgetary envelopes for the three funding sources need to be strengthened in an even manner in order to avoid asymmetric distribution of investment between the levels; Calls on the Commission to facilitate simplified, timely and flexible procedure for transferability of resources between regions, operational programmes and programme axes under ESIF in order to adequately meet changing economic reality and regional demand.
Amendment 57 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that the role of additional sources such as the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) needs to be defined in view of their complementarity to the ERDF and CF and their additionality to EIB lending operations; notes that the 2017 CEF Transport Blending Call has also been designed to strengthen those synergies, but exchange of best practices between Member States and further support to capacity is needed; highlights in this regard that EFSI should serve as a platform for public-private partnerships (PPPs) in matching financial instruments to private investment and to national/regional financing at project level; notes that the support available through the EU guarantee should be provided to bankable infrastructure projects which would not otherwise be supported through the ERDF, CF or CEF;
Amendment 93 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Notes, that sustainable innovations in transport require synergies and additionally between three main instruments - ESI Funds, CEF, Horizon 2020 and its successor;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for ERDF support to European Territorial Cooperation to be strengthened through additional resources, and for the establishment of a dedicated priority axis for transport infrastructure investments (such as ports, bridges, railways etc.); understands that the focus should be on connectivity in cross-border regions, including EU external borders, as well as advisory assistance and capacity building at project level; calls for barriers to be dismantled in order to facilitate investments, and notably cross- border investments, in transport;
Amendment 103 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Calls for closing the transport infrastructure gaps with the Western Balkans by focusing on further investment in connectivity and on tackling transport bottlenecks, especially in view of Commission’s communication on the European perspective for the Western Balkans; considers in this regard the importance of the European Territorial Cooperation and the macroregional strategies involving the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Serbia, Kosovo, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Montenegro;