5 Amendments of Ruža TOMAŠIĆ related to 2016/2303(INI)
Amendment 12 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Welcomes the Commission’s activities funded by technical assistance, in particular its work on the TAIEX REGIO PEER 2 PEER instrument, the Competency Framework and Self-Assessment Tool and the Integrity Pact, the Integrity Pacts, the Guide for practitioners on how to avoid the 25 most common errors on public procurement and the Study on stocktaking administrative capacity on public procurement in 28 Member States; calls on the Member States to make use of such initiatives to the extent possible; stresses that such instruments should have a greater role in the post-2020 cohesion policy;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Is concerned that in certain Member States technical assistance does not reach the local and regional authorities in an effective way; highlights that it is crucial to establish sound and transparent communication channels between the different levels of governance in order to successfully implement the ESI Funds, but also to restore trust in the effective functioning of the EU and its policies; welcomes, therefore, the multi-layered system of implementing Cohesion Policy in Poland (3 pillars of technical assistance) which enables more result- oriented, coordinated strategic and transparent approach and generates greater added value; calls on the Member States to develop mechanisms to involve ESI Funds beneficiaries in the implementation and monitoring of technical assistance;
Amendment 63 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Emphasises that the capacity of the lower levels of governance is also essential for the success of the new territorial development tools, such as Community-led Local Development and the Integrated Territorial Investment; calls for the continued decentralisation of the implementation of Community-led Local Development; notes that while it may be difficult to measure the effects of technical assistance, it is by no means impossible, particularly when looking at benefit-cost ratio; emphasises that in some Member States, technical assistance provided for the establishment of a complete system for the implementation of the ERDF and the establishment of a system for the implementation of ITIs is showing a negative benefit-cost ratio; notes that ITIs account for 5% of the value of the ERDF, while technical assistance for the establishment of a system for the implementation of ITIs accounts for 50% of the value of the ERDF; calls, accordingly, for clear control mechanisms to be put in place, in particular as regards non-transparent negotiations on technical assistance;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Highlights that the largest part of technical assistance resources is spent on staff costs which are necessary for the implementation of ESI Funds; considers, however, that this funding should not under any circumstances act as a substitute for national financing in this area, and that there should be a gradual strategic shift towards activities which generate greater added value for cohesion policy in general, such as communication or experience- sharing; stresses that many Member States are not applying the Code or Delegated Regulation (EU) No 240/2014;
Amendment 80 #
16. Stresses that technical assistance in the future should be increasingly focused on the beneficiary/project level in order to ensure the supply of innovative and well- designed projects fitting in with already existing strategies; highlights that technical assistance may be used for testing innovative solutions-pilot projects;