14 Amendments of Rosa D'AMATO related to 2017/2052(INI)
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Recital C a (new)
Recital C a (new)
C a. whereas some of the proposals for new own resources presented in the final report and recommendations of the High Level Group on Own Resources of December 2016, such as a financial transaction tax, a carbon tax imposed on all sources of greenhouse gas emissions, and a European corporate income tax are worth analysing in a broader context and would also be consistent with both the targets of the 2030 Climate and Energy Framework and the objectives of economic, social and territorial cohesion;
Amendment 22 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. States that cohesion policy should remain the EU’s main investment policy, but that more needs to be done to highlight the major role of cohesion policy in achieving some of the EU’s political objectives; underlines, in this regard, that cohesion policy is not supposed to be the solution and the funding instrument for every unforeseen event and that it should not contribute to the establishment of new programmes, such as EFSI or the Structural Reform Support Programme, which are manifestly inconsistent with the rationale and objectives of cohesion policy;
Amendment 30 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Asks the European Commission to present the proposal for the new regulation for the European Structural and Investment Funds as soon as possible, so as to enable a proper discussion with the European Parliament and the Council and a timely approval of the new legislative framework;
Amendment 32 #
2a. Calls on the Commission to assess the impact of cohesion funds on the lives of EU citizens; takes the view that these resources should be geared to an approach that gives priority to environmental protection, security and public health and that takes account of social aspects;
Amendment 43 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Considers that the next multiannual financial framework (MFF) should allow for adequate EU funding, including structural and investment funds, for projects which contribute, in particular, to the completion of the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T) core network and its corridors; calls for direct funding to be allocated by taking account of the socio-economic development priorities of the European macro-regions; reiterates that financial instruments cannot replace grants for TEN- T projects, as only grants can maximise output on the ground; takes the view that grants should not be used to compensate for losses in projects that are economically unsustainable; considers, furthermore, that better coordination of EU instruments related to transport, including blending of grants and innovative financial instruments, can facilitate project implementation and catalyse private financing;
Amendment 45 #
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 domay, however, have an important role to play in certain cases role to play in specific cases, but which should always undergo both an ex-ante and ex-post analysis; highlights the dangers of financial products such as equity, trust funds and other types of bonds, which have a high-risk profile and are always advertised as having a very high leverage effect; considers that it would be safer and more useful to promote other forms of low-risk instruments, such as easy-term loans, guarantees and forms of crowd funding; stresses that in the event of a reduction in the EU’s budgets, greater focus on the EU’s core goals is required;
Amendment 60 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that strengthening the governance of EU macro-regional strategies, such as in the Danube, Black Sea, Baltic, Adriatic and Ionian regions, will contribute to developing EU added value projects; regrets, in particular, the exclusion of part of the Adriatic route from the TEN-T European corridors and calls for it to be included, so that it can benefit from CEF funds; notes that the extension of the TEN-T network to the southern Adriatic region is a necessary step towards greater territorial and strategic cohesion in relation to the Adriatic-Ionian macro-region;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Considers that a 5+5 year MFF period might be preferable, provided that some kind of revision within the five-year period is also provided for;
Amendment 102 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Reiterates the importance of enabling the full use of the Single European Sky as a crucial step forward for European airspace; stresses the need for adequate funding to implement the components of Single European Sky ATM Research (SESAR) in order to ensure the deployment of ATM functionalities; notes that the interests of EU citizens should be protected by means of greater transparency with regard to the results achieved by the funding used by Joint Undertakings, in addition to a strategy to combat waste;
Amendment 103 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Calls for the Commission to look into the possibilities for greater synergies between thecohesion policy and different EU funds, including cohesion policy,such as Horizon 2020 and EFSI;
Amendment 115 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Considers that it is essential, in the context of the new MFF, to ensure not only that budgetary rules, and rules on cohesion policy spending, are at last simplified., but that a proper balance between simplification and controls is ensured;
Amendment 118 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8 a. Calls for an increase in the budget, and the further revision, of the European Solidarity Fund, especially concerning the maximum threshold of advances (currently capped at EUR 30 million) laid down in article 4a of the Revised EUSF Regulation, in order to effectively and promptly address a greater part of the damages caused by natural disasters;
Amendment 120 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Underlines the importance of secured funding to achieve an integrated maritime policy, as a flagship initiative for cross-sectoral and trans-national governance, as well as for optimising multimodal connections and shifting to digital transport services and sustainable transport modes, including inland waterways; calls on the Commission to give fresh impetus to the EU's role in the Mediterranean Sea through a strategy to upgrade and modernise seaports in the Mediterranean, as vital European trade hubs;
Amendment 129 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls on the Commission to add a specific item to the budget for those ports which have to deal with the economic and social burden of the migration crisis;