27 Amendments of Rosa D'AMATO related to 2016/2148(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Takes note of the Commission communication regarding negotiations of partnership agreements (PAs) and operational programmes (OPs) as required by Article 16(3) of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR) and considers it disappointing that the Commission, instead of producing a report, as was originally intended, has merely submitted a communication;
Amendment 3 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Is surprised that, instead of the report required by Article 16(3) of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR), the Commission has presented only a communication, which therefore has no binding effect, regarding negotiations of partnership agreements (PAs) and operational programmes (OPs);
Amendment 7 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is of the opinion that the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIFs) must be used to boost quality jobs, sustainable growth and development and shared prosperity across Europe, with a special focus on supporting the most vulnerable groups in society and promoting greater employment through a circular economy and renewable energies;
Amendment 8 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Is of the opinion that the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI Funds) are crucial investment tools, including for rural areas, and that the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) is one of the main financing vehicles for boosting rural development in many Member States;
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Considers that the ESI Funds should be used to promote high-quality jobs, totally free of abuse and exploitation, and to support sustainable development, focusing in particular on the circular economy and renewable energy sources in a low-carbon context serving also to reduce pollutant emissions;
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the negotiations for PAs and Operational Programmes (OPs) for the period 2014-2020 have been a modernised, strongly adjusted and intensive exercise with a new framework for performance- based budgeting, ex-ante conditionalities and thematic concentration, resulting inadvertently, also because of clear shortcomings in the administrative capacity of several regions and Member States, in serious delays in the actual commencement of cohesion policy implementation;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Believes it is necessary, in making use of ESIFs, to separate cofunding from the Stability and Growth Pact;
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas cohesion policy is confronted in the current period with many challenges, deriving from the financial crisis, austerity policies and the management of the migration issue, leading to a decrease in public investment in many Member States, leaving the ESI funds and co-financing by the Member States as the main tool for public investment in many Member States, and from the migration crisis;
Amendment 23 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3α. Points to the importance of the EAFRD for micro, small, and medium- sized enterprises;
Amendment 35 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Notes that 6 million unemployed young people are to benefit from the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) – which will help them find jobs or improve their skills and qualifications – now that YEI has been integrated into 34 ESF programmes in the 20 eligible Member States; is concerned, however, about the delayed start to the implementation of the YEI and at the way in which the Youth Guarantee is being implemented in certain regions; urges Member States to intensify their efforts to ensure that the results envisaged are achieved successfully and that the initiative is implemented correctly and with no covert exploitation of young workers; calls in particular for account to be taken of the real needs of the business community in using ESIFs to meet training requirements, so as to create real employment opportunities;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Notes that Europe has been going through a difficult phase in both economic and political terms, so that a decent investment policy that is close to citizens and more commensurate with the real needs and vocations of local areas is needed now more than ever;
Amendment 44 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Regrets that that progress towards the Europe 2020 employment and anti- poverty goals have not been met; expresses particular concern that the worst results are being obtained from less developed regions or regions in transition;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Observes that the key communication on cohesion policy projects should focus on European added value and the visibility of success stories; insists that communication on the subject of the ESI Funds should be modernised and intensified; considers it necessary, in order to make cohesion policy genuinely more credible again, to highlight sufficiently both 'good' and 'bad' practices, through databases that go beyond providing a scant description of the project and the expenditure incurred, thus enabling citizens to check effectively both the added value and value of most of the projects implemented and, in certain cases, their lack of usefulness in relation to a given local area;
Amendment 53 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Urges the Commission to seek constant monitoring of the use of ESIFs so as to ensure their effectiveness and transparency;
Amendment 54 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 b (new)
Paragraph 7 b (new)
7b. Asks the Commission to support the role of ESIFs in the promotion of research and innovation in micro, small and medium-sized enterprises;
Amendment 55 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 c (new)
Paragraph 7 c (new)
7c. Recommends that the Commission actively commit to ESIFs for job creation in a low carbon economic environment with reduced pollutant emissions;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)
Paragraph 6 a (new)
6a. Believes that it is necessary, when making use of ESIFs, to separate co- financing from the Stability and Growth Pact;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Notes that only rarely do ESF- supported measures generate revenue directly, and that grants are therefore the appropriate tool for their implementation, while certain financial instruments, such as loans and guarantees, could be a useful complementary tool for certain ESF interventions with a possible leverage effect;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that the more flexible structure of the EAFRD was not fully taken advantage of by some Members States and regions which perceived a risk of increased complexity and control requirements; expresses disquiet at the results for less developed regions and regions in transition, which are the worst recorded to date;
Amendment 76 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 11 a (new)
Paragraph 11 a (new)
11a. Calls on the Commission also to seek to harmonise definitions and rules so to achieve greater coherence between the various funds and instruments.
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Supports the shift from a focus on major infrastructure-related projects towards a focus on stimulating the knowledge economy, innovation and social inclusion;
Amendment 94 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Urges the Commission to work towards continuous monitoring of the use of ESIFs in order to make them effective and transparent;
Amendment 110 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls on the Commission, in addition, to seek to harmonise definitions and rules in order to provide greater coherence among the funds and instruments.
Amendment 116 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. FavoursConsiders that the establishment of a balanced link between cohesion policy and the European Semester, as both wespecially where it consists of the option fork towards achieving the same aims under the Europe 2020 She Commission – provided for in Article 23 of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR) – to propose amendments to the Partnership Agreement of a Member State to support the implementation of relevant Council Recommendations, runs totally counter to the economic, social and territorial cohesion aims laid down in the treategyies;
Amendment 154 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Supports a further balanced increase in financial instruments; aAsks the Commission, therefore, to come forward with incentives forto ensure that managing authorities to achieve thisare better informed on the opportunities for using financial instruments and their scope;
Amendment 167 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Notes, however, the lack of evidence on the outcomes and results achieved by financial instruments and the loose link between those financial instruments and the overarching objectives and priorities of the EU;
Amendment 236 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37
Paragraph 37
37. Underlines that faster take-up of the available funds is needed in future; takes the viewvital in future, with a more balanced progression of expenditure during the programming cycle, also in order to avoid frequently turning to 'consistent' projects, which are often funded with the sole aim of avoiding automatic decommitment; hopes that after adoption of the future regulation, implementation of the OPs will be able to start more quickly, as Member States will already have experience of a performance- oriented policy after the efforts made for cohesion policy 2014- 2020; regrets, however, in this regard, the delays on the part of several Member States in appointing managing authorities for the OPs;