Activities of Ivana MALETIĆ related to 2017/2279(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
Strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion in the EU (short presentation) HR
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on strengthening economic, social and territorial cohesion in the European Union: the 7th report of the European Commission
Amendments (19)
Amendment 2 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Stresses the crucial role cCohesion pPolicy has played in the achievement ofing economic and social convergence in the EU, narrowing disparities, safeguarding investments and strengthening resistance to the impacts of globalisation; expresses concern, however, that inequalities persist between rich and poor regions and between the salaries of the social categories of citizens; therefore highlights that investments into new technologies, modernisation, new skills and knowledge, innovation, research and development which will help less developed regions move up the value chain, should be strongly supported by Cohesion Policy, harmonised throughout the entire EU budget and in synergy with national budgets; stresses that neither the objectives nor the EU funding of cCohesion pPolicy should be watered down;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Notes the shortcomings of the financial planning and implementation system, which have led to thedelays in requests for payments, backlogs and accumulation of unpaid bills; expstresses concern at thethat the late conclusion of 2014-2020 MFF negotiations and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF funds) regulations resulted with 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; therefore calls for quick negotiations and agreement on the new post 2020 MFF and adoption of new ESI Funds regulations as soon as possible; stresses that the level of payment appropriations should match past commitments;
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
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 17 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
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)
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 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
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; Ttakes the view that cohesion policy ceilings should be raisedat the same level of funding for the EU-27 in the next programming period while further improving its effectiveness and simplifying the procedures associated with it so that the EU can finally have all the funds it needs to meet its objectives and priorities, as set out under the Treaties;
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
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 spill-over benefits to non-cohesion countries from the increased trade generated and strengthening the Single Market;
Amendment 73 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
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, while improving coordination and stresses the need to consider linkages with macro regions strategies within ETC, while improving coordination and simplifying and harmonizing rules and procedures between different programmes to avoid overlaps; and ensure smooth implementation.
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
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 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
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; as well as co- financing and state aid rules; stresses that more flexibility between operational programmes and thematic priorities is needed to ensure quick reaction and alignment with the needs in practice in order to make these areas more attractive for the businesses and young people.
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
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; suggests in particular extending the specific allocation for the outermost regions to the social component, maintaining the current level of Union co-financing in those regions, and better tailoring the thematic concentration;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
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 134 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
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; stresses however that the results of Smart Specialization strategy process were, in some regions, inadequate due to the lack of resources, potential partners, tech transfer support system etc., and calls therefore for more cooperation and exchange of knowledge and experience among the regions.
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
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 161 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
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, innov opportunities, new skills and knowledge, innovation, industrial transformation, support for SMEs, climate change and the circular economy should constitute priority areas for cohesion policy in future;
Amendment 194 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
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 202 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
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 264 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
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 constant and good quality education is precondition for capacity building, calls therefore the Commission to prepare action plans for educations and exchange of knowledge and best practices among the member states in the fields of project preparation, public procurement, state aid rules, project implementation, financial management etc.; underlines that final beneficiaries should have administrative support from the responsible authorities during implementation; encourages Member States to use simplified cost option since it proves to be easier to implement and resulted with no errors.
Amendment 343 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39
Paragraph 39
39. Reiterates its commitment to long- term programming; considers that the only viable alternative to the current period of seven years is an MFF period of 5+5 years, with a mid-term review; stresses however that the new time-frame could be introduced only for the period after 2027.