Activities of Steeve BRIOIS related to 2015/2224(INI)
Plenary speeches (1)
New territorial development tools in cohesion policy 2014-2020 (A8-0032/2016 - Ruža Tomašić) FR
Shadow reports (1)
REPORT on new territorial development tools in cohesion policy 2014-2020: Integrated Territorial Investment (ITI) and Community-Led Local Development (CLLD) PDF (341 KB) DOC (141 KB)
Amendments (25)
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas the 2014-2020 generation of cohesion policy is supposed to provides for and encourages the use of integrated and place-based approaches to foster economic, social and territorial cohesion;
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas, in cohesion policy, CLLD and ITI are innovativenew instruments in cohesion policy, whichthat are subject to an overly complex procedure; whereas some Member States will implement them in such form for the first time and which can; whereas their complexity could discourage potential beneficiaries from using them; whereas it is therefore rather unlikely that these instruments will contribute significantly to the achievement of economic, social and territorial cohesion, and in particular the creation of quality local jobs, sustainable urban development and attainment of the Europe 2020 objectives;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas CLLD builds on the LEADER approach which has led to an exponential increase in Local Action Groups (LAGs) since its inception in 1991; whereas this approach may weaken the role of national governments in regulating structural funds, and is playing a part in limiting their influence when it comes to devising territorial policies;
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas ITI is a tool which can be used to deliver integrated actions for sustainable urban development, as defined in Article 7 of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) regulation (Regulation (EU) No 1301/2013); whereas it can also target other types of territory; whereas urban policies remain within the competences of the Member States;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas considerable differences exist between the Member States in terms of governance structures and experience in bottom-up development initiatives; whereas the Member States should be guaranteed that they will be able to freely choose their governance structures, and that under no circumstances will a governance model be imposed on them;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas the capacity and engagement of local actors is dessentialirable for the successimplementation of these tools;
Amendment 35 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that proper delegation of responsibilities to local actors and their ownership of territorial development strategies are crucial for the success of the bottom-up approach; stresses, however, that local actors require technical and financial support from national and EU levels, especially in the early stages of the implementation process;
Amendment 40 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that the integration of multiple funds continues to be a challenge for stakeholders, particularly in the context of CLLD and ITI; considers that comprehensive simplification efforts are necessary in order to create favourable conditions for the implementation of these tools; welcomes, therefore, the establishmenthere appropriate, calls ofn the High Level Group of Independent Experts on Monitoring Simplification for Beneficiaries of the European Structural and Investment Funds and the Commission’s efforts in the field of Better Regulation; stresses the need to find common ground when making recommendations, as simplification in one Member State might lead to complication in anotherMember States to stop implementing these very complex tools, which will lead to additional administrative costs being incurred by the smallest and least developed towns;
Amendment 86 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Highlights, in particular, the necessity to tackle gold-plating practices at European level, by which additional, and often unnecessary, requirements and hurdles are created at national and regional levels; notes that many audit layers often exist which increase the administrative burden for beneficiaries; recommends that audit activities are streamlined and that monitoring is focused on performance, while maintaining an adequate level of control;
Amendment 89 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls on the Member States to develop and implement targeted training activities focusing on CLLD and ITI for local actors; considers it crucial to ensure the involvement and adequate representation of all relevant sectors of society in such activities; stresses the importance of the efficient and effective use of technical assistance in supporting these instruments;
Amendment 94 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. WelcomesTakes note of the creation of the new CLLD instrument, which has gone beyond the previous LEADER initiative to empower local communities and provide specific local solutions, not only via EAFRD, but also the other ESI Funds;
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. RegretsTakes note of the fact that in a number of Member States CLLD will be instituted through a mono-fund approach which can lead to missed opportunities in creating more effective local development strategies;
Amendment 120 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Commission, together with the Member States, to eEncourages the sharing of best practices concerning LAGs at European level while using existing instruments and platforms such as TAIEX REGIO PEER 2 PEER, URBACT, and the Urban Development Network;
Amendment 128 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Highlights the fundamental importance of a non-discriminatory and transparent approach and of minimising potential conflicts of interest; welcomes, furthermore, the participation of a wide range of partners in LAGs; emphasises, however, that the provision whereby public authorities cannot hold more than 49% of voting rights in LAGs, as provided for in the current legislative framework, may in certain situations impede the implementation of CLLD since the other interest groups involved might lack the adequate expertise and resources; asks the Commission to closely monitor and assess the implementation of this provision in order to detect regions where these requirements can pose particular problems, and possibly provide future recommendations;
Amendment 136 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Notes that diverse governance approaches are possible in the implementation of ITIs; considers it crucial, nevertheless, that local partners play their role as key actors in preparing the territorial development strategy of the ITI, and are also fully involved in its management, monitoring and audit responsibilities, thereby helping to ensure genuine local ownership of ITI interventions;
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Stresses that the early involvement of local governments in the territorial development strategy, leading from the bottom up, is key is desirable for the future ownership, participation and success of the integrated territorial strategy that will be implemented at the local level;
Amendment 153 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21
Paragraph 21
21. WelcomesTakes note of the efforts of the Commission, together with the Expert Group on Territorial Cohesion and Urban Matters (TCUM), on preparing ITI scenarios; endorses the view, however, that such guidance was needed earlier in the programming process and that its usability is therefore questionable; considers it necessary to update the guidance with real examples and lessons learned from ITIs once they are implemented;
Amendment 156 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22
Paragraph 22
22. Is of the opinion that CLLD and ITI should play a more prominent role in the future cohesion policy; cCalls on the Commission to prepare a report before the new legislative proposal on the performance of ITI and CLLD and on possible post- 2020 scenarios related to these tools;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24