25 Amendments of Ivana MALETIĆ related to 2017/2052(INI)
Amendment 17 #
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas the new challenges and global instability that the EU is facing today should be properly addressed, and it is essential that economic, social and territorial cohesion should remain a high priority for the EU;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. States that cohesion policy should remain the EU’s main investment and development policy, but that more needs to be done to highlight the major role of cohesion policy in achieving the EU’s political objectives; considers, therefore, that a strong focus is needed on employment, skills, innovation, SMEs, social inclusion, and specific EU goals such as digitalisation and reindustrialisation, as well as on a reinforced social dimension, territorial cooperation and the urban dimension;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
Ca. whereas, the late conclusion of the 2014-2020 MFF negotiations and of the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds) regulations resulted in delays in implementation, thus causing the delays in absorption of ESI funds and problems with execution of the commitment and payment appropriations in the EU budget;
Amendment 34 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls, therefore, for the MFF to provide for sufficient funds for cohesion policy post-2020, striking a good balance between investments in citizens and investments for citizens and ensuring that the EU’s political goals can be reached; recalls that, in view of the late start of the period and the expected volume of payment claims towards the end of it, it is of considerable importance to increase the payment ceiling of Heading 1b in order to ensure liquidity and investment flow and to avoid the impact of potential political risks; notes that the creation of future, and the support to current, EU programmes and instruments should not take place at the expense of existing investment;
Amendment 47 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that regional funding should be protected and should continue to predominantly take the form of grants rather than financial instruments, which do, however, have an important role to play in certain cases; stresses that in the event of a reduction in the EU’s budgets, greater focus on the EU’s core goals is required; notes that binding targets for the use of financial instruments in the post-2020 MFF cannot be considered a viable option; notes that increasing the share of financial instruments should not influence non-refundable financial contributions, as this would hinder the required balance;
Amendment 52 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that regional funding should be protected and should continue to predominantly take the form of grants rather than financial instruments, which do, however, have an important role to play in certain cases; considers that Member States should be free to choose between grants and financial instruments/guarantees; stresses that in the event of a reduction in the EU’s budgets, greater focus on the EU’s core goals is required;
Amendment 63 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that a 5+5 year MFF period might be preferablemaintaining the current length (7 years) of the MFF is essential for cohesion policy, which needs a longer-term implementation period, given the time it takes to agree on sectoral legislation and operational programmes;
Amendment 75 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for the priorities of regional development programmes to be updated in order to take changing conditions into account and to benefit from new technology; also considers that more flexibility is required in the MFF to meet unforeseen challengescalls for additional criteria for the allocation of non-refundable funding and for setting co-financing rates; considers the regional unemployment rates and regional social progress index to be appropriate criteria; also considers that more flexibility is required in the MFF to meet unforeseen challenges; notes that challenges such as migration and security or political developments in the EU should not negatively affect the investments in Heading 1 or its goals and expected results, especially after the current programming period;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls for the priorities of regional development programmes to be updated in order to take changing conditions into account and to benefit from new technology; also considers that more flexibility is required in the MFF to meet unforeseen challenges; stresses that financing for new priorities should be ensured in the EU budget from the savings and at the level of national budgets; Member States should be free to choose to use ESI Funds as a source of financing for new priorities;
Amendment 81 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5 a. Stresses that the significant level of growth needed for job creation and development cannot be achieved without joint efforts for the implementation of a good economic policy mix, which consists of investment, structural reforms and fiscal consolidation;considers, therefore, that funding for structural reforms linked to the European Semester should be guaranteed in the national budgets, and Member States should be free to choose to use ESI Funds as an additional source for financing structural reforms;
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the importance of regional cross-border initiatives in promoting economic growth; underlines that the Connecting Europe Facility and the Cohesion Fund should remain the major source of infrastructure investment, and that funding appropriations should match the existing high demand and oversubscription;
Amendment 89 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the importance of regional cross-border initiatives in promoting economic growth; states that specific measures for the outermost regions, disadvantaged regions and islands are also needed in order to reduce the economic, social and environmental disparities between regions;
Amendment 93 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6 a. Recalls that investment in Heading 1a showcases a strong positive impact on policies;considers that programmes such as the successor programme to Horizon 2020 should receive twice the funding available under the current framework programme;notes that estimates, demand and success rates indicate that such an increase would relief the research and innovation funding gap;
Amendment 94 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. CNotes that combining grants and financial instruments has an unexplored potential owing to administrative burdens; calls for the Commission to look into the possibilities for greater synergies between the different EU funds, including cohesion policy, Horizon 2020 and EFSI; notes that the take-up of financial instruments and synergies with grants can be improved by encouraging investment partnerships and public-private partnerships locally;
Amendment 108 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that it is essential, in the context of the new MFF, to ensure that budgetary rules, and rules on cohesion policy spending, are at last simplified. in order to positively impact the sustainability of the next MFF, as well as to reduce the burden on beneficiaries; underlines that, in the context of maximising the performance of the MFF as regards conditionality, it is important to find the right balance so as not to jeopardise investments;
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Considers that the use of the EGF, providing EU solidarity and support to workers losing their jobs as a result of major structural changes in world trade patterns arising from globalisation or as a result of the global economic and financial crisis, has not lived up to expectations and needs to be improved and linked with the instruments contributing the European Pillar of Social Rights; points out, inter alia, that the procedures for implementing support from the EGF are too time- consuming and cumbersome; believes that a revised EGF should be endowed with at least an identical annual allocation under the new MFF;
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Underlines that the MFF special instruments should be counted over and above the MFF ceilings both for commitment and payment appropriations and within the legal limits of the Treaties; considers that the issue of budgeting the payments of these instruments was settled in an unequivocal manner during the 2014- 2020 MFF mid-term revision, putting an end to the long-standing conflict of interpretation with the Council; advocates the introduction of a clear provision in the MFF Regulation, stating that payments resulting from the mobilisation in commitments of MFF special instruments should be counted over and above the annual MFF payment ceilings;
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 48 a (new)
Paragraph 48 a (new)
48a. Underlines that, in the context of maximising the performance of the MFF as regards conditionality, it is important to find the right balance so as not to jeopardise investments; requests that the Commission build upon the positive elements of the ex-ante conditionality system, while reducing the corresponding administrative burden as regards assessment and procedure;
Amendment 300 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 61
Paragraph 61
61. Recalls its request to the Commission to identify EU policy areas where grants could be combined with financial instruments and to reflect on a proper balance between the two; is convinced that subsidies should remain the predominant way of funding the EU project in the next MFF; notes that the take-up of financial instruments and synergies with grants can be improved; highlights, in this context, that special attention should be paid to state aid rules, so as to provide a level playing field for grants and financial instruments; underlines that loans, guarantees, risk- sharing and equity financing should be used with caution, based on appropriate ex- ante assessments and only when their use can demonstrate a clear added value and a leverage effect;
Amendment 307 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62
Paragraph 62
62. Calls on the Commission to simplify and harmonise the rules governing the use of financial instruments in the next MFF in order to maximise their efficient application; considers the option of a single fund that would integrate financial instruments at EU level that are centrally managed under such programmes as the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF), Horizon 2020, COSME, Creative Europe and the Employment and Social Innovation programme (EaSI) on the one hand and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) on the other, a proposal to be discussed further; is of the opinion that such an umbrella solution should provide for a clear structure for the choice of different types of financial instruments for different policy areas and types of actions; underlines, however, that such a fund could never integrate financial instruments managed by Member States under cohesion policy; stresses that within MFF post 2020 structure these programmes cannot be included under one single line for horizontal (financial) instruments supporting investments;
Amendment 322 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 65
Paragraph 65
65. Believes, therefore, that the current presentation of the headings requires some improvements, but is against any unjustified radical changes; proposes, as a result, the following structure for the MFF post-2020; Heading 1: A stronger and sustainablcompetitive economy Including programmes and instruments supporting: under direct management: - research and innovation - industry, entrepreneurship and small and medium-sized enterprises - large-infrastructure projects - transport, digitalisation, energy - adaptation - - - supporting investments in Europe (possible umbrella financial instrument at EU level, incl. EFSI) environment and climate change agriculture and rural development maritime affairs and fisheries horizontal (financial) instruments Heading 2: Sustainable development, preservation and management of natural resources - agriculture and rural development - maritime affairs and fisheries - environment and climate change adaptation Heading 23: Stronger cohesion and solidarity in Europe Including programmes and instruments supporting: - economic, social and territorial cohesion (under shared management): investments in innovation, digitalisation, reindustrialisation, SMEs, transport, climate change adaptation employment, social affairs and social inclusion - education and life-long learning - culture, citizenship and communication - health and food safety - asylum, migration and integration, justice and consumers - support to and coordination with national administrations Heading 34: Stronger responsibility in the world Including programmes and instruments supporting: - international cooperation and development - neighbourhood - enlargement - humanitarian aid - trade - contribution to EU trust funds and external relations facilities Heading 45: Security, peace and stability for all Including programmes and instruments supporting: - security - crisis response and stability - common foreign and security policy - defence Heading 56: An efficient administration at the service of Europeans - financing EU staff - financing the buildings and equipment of EU institutions
Amendment 331 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 16
Subheading 16
A stronger and sustainablcompetitive economy
Amendment 420 #
Motion for a resolution
Subheading 16 a (new)
Subheading 16 a (new)
Sustainable development, preservation and management of natural resources
Amendment 516 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82 a (new)
Paragraph 82 a (new)
82a. Recognises the important contribution of cohesion policy in facilitating structural reforms through incentives, such as ex ante conditionalities, rather than sanctions, and calls on the Commission to explore other positive means of supporting national and regional efforts; underlines that the MFF should support the priorities outlined in the European Semester, in particular by taking account of country-specific recommendations, while bearing in mind the objectives of cohesion policy enshrined in the Treaties; recalls that new EU priorities and initiatives should be financed with fresh funding, and that cohesion policy should not be jeopardised by its current envelope being used as a source of funding for such new priorities and initiatives;
Amendment 521 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 82 b (new)
Paragraph 82 b (new)
82b. Stresses the importance of regional cross-border initiatives in promoting European integration as well as smart, sustainable and inclusive economic growth and job creation; points out that European Territorial Cooperation (Interreg) is a key area of EU added value for ensuring the continuity of, and linkages between, common projects across borders and across the EU; is of the opinion that these cross-border initiatives in particular show the added value of the European Union;