8 Amendments of Jérôme LAVRILLEUX related to 2018/0196(COD)
Amendment 68 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12
Recital 12
(12) At Union level, the European Semester of economic policy coordination is the framework to identify national reform priorities and monitor their implementation. Member States develop their own national multiannual investment strategies in support of these reform priorities. These strategies should be presented alongside the yearly National Reform Programmes as a way to outline and coordinate priority investment projects to be supported by national and Union funding. They should also serve to use Union funding in a coherent manner and to maximise the added value of the financial support to be received notably from the Funds, the European Investment Stabilisation Function and InvestEU. In general, Member States and, where appropriate, the Commission should foster synergies and ensure coordination, complementarity and coherence between these specific priorities and the European Pillar of Social Rights.
Amendment 89 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 a (new)
Recital 28 a (new)
(28a) There ought to be provision for use to be made of regional indicators so that subregional disparities can be taken into account more effectively.
Amendment 97 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 44
Recital 44
(44) In full respect of the applicable State aid and public procurement rules already clarified during the 2014-2020 programming period, the managing authorities should have the possibility to decide on the most appropriate implementation options for financial instruments in order to address the specific needs of target regions. Furthermore, the undoubted consequences - at national and, above all, subnational level - of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the EU might make it necessary to apply state aid rules with sufficient flexibility to ensure that certain critical situations can be dealt with.
Amendment 98 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 48 a (new)
Recital 48 a (new)
Amendment 100 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 50
Recital 50
(50) To ensure an appropriate balance between the effective and efficient implementation of the Funds and the related administrative costs and burdens, the frequency, scope and coverage of management verifications should be based on a risk assessment that takes account of factors such as the type of operations implemented, the beneficiaries as well as the level of risk identified by previous management verifications and audits. Management and control of the Funds should be governed by the principle of proportionality in relation to the level of risk to the budget of the Union. .
Amendment 109 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66 a (new)
Recital 66 a (new)
(66a) It should be pointed out that the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the Union will have an asymmetrical impact on local and regional authorities, depending both on the economic sectors involved, such as fisheries, agriculture and, above all, port activities, and on the particular regions and Member States concerned. The fact is that some regions and Member States are more exposed to economic risks because of the nature and extent of their trading links with the United Kingdom. Making use of the specific budget heading created in 2001 to help border regions in their dealings with prospective Member States should be looked into as a way of providing a stabilisation fund to mitigate the economic consequences of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal. Furthermore, in the light of the challenges posed by Brexit at local and regional level, there will need to be ongoing cooperation involving exchanges of good practices at local and regional authority level.
Amendment 332 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 66 a (new)
Recital 66 a (new)
(66a) It should be pointed out that the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the Union will have an asymmetrical impact on local and regional authorities, depending both on the economic sectors involved, such as fisheries, agriculture and, above all, port activities, and on the particular regions and Member States concerned. The fact is that some regions and Member States are more exposed to economic risks because of the nature and extent of their trading links with the United Kingdom. Making use of the specific budget heading created in 2001 to help border regions in their dealings with prospective Member States should be looked into as a way of providing a stabilisation fund to mitigate the economic consequences of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal. Furthermore, in the light of the challenges posed by Brexit at local and regional level, there will need to be an ongoing cooperation involving exchanges of good practices at local and regional authority level.
Amendment 2085 #
Proposal for a regulation
Annex XXIV – point 16 a (new)
Annex XXIV – point 16 a (new)
16a. A total of EUR 120 000 000 will be allocated to create a specific support fund for EU regions affected by the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the Union. The aim of this fund is to mitigate the economic consequences and asymmetrical impact of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal and to provide targeted support to the EU local and regional authorities and to the sectors negatively affected, including fisheries, agriculture, tourism and port activities. This fund shall pay particular attention to EU regions that will, as a result of the United Kingdom’s withdrawal, find themselves situated on an external (sea or land) EU border.