33 Amendments of Georgi PIRINSKI related to 2017/2052(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas Article 3 of the Treaty on the European Union stipulates that the Union should promote economic, social and territorial cohesion and solidarity among Member States; whereas regional cohesion policy is one of the EU’s core policies, bringing Europe together and strengthening its economy and its social convergence, and it is therefore key that sufficient funding for cohesion policy is provided for in the MFF;
Amendment 12 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission, when presenting its proposal for the post-2020 MFF, to accompany it with a detailed outline of the strategic priorities in accordance with which the draft MFF is build; these priorities should be subject of consideration in the course of elaborating a comprehensive Europe 2030 Strategy, to be examined in-depth by the European Parliament before finalization of the post- 2020 MFF package by the Council;
Amendment 20 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4a. Asks also the Commission, before drafting its proposal for a new MFF, to carry out a comparative analysis of the implementation costs of grants and of repayable financial support, mainly through financial instruments, for the 2014-2020 period with a view to establishing the actual level of such costs, as recommended in the European Court of Auditors’ Special Report 19/20161a; __________________ 1a European Court of Auditors’ Special Report 19/2016 “Implementing the EU budget through financial instruments - lessons to be learnt from the 2007-2013 programme period”.
Amendment 21 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Calls on the Commission to take the spending review’s results carefully into account when drafting the MFF proposal or any proposal for a future EU sand for the elaboration of a comprehensive Europe 2030 Strategy; insists, in this regard, that the Commission ensures that the administrative and control mechanisms are reliable at all levels and in all phases of the EU budget framework, and that frauds and irregularities can be prevented efficiently; calls on the Commission to move towards a risk-based evaluation whereby control resources could be focused more on those regions and policy fields where the risks of irregularities have proven to be more significant;
Amendment 25 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Considers that flexibility should be applied on the basis of analyses proving that there is in fact a change of political priorities and goals, as well as impact assessment of the comparative effectiveness of redirecting resources already included in the MFF or providing new resources;
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Points out that in the course of the current MFF period, the EU has suffered multiple crises; calls on the Commission to provide flexibility in the budget planning so that it is able to tackle unexpectedly changing circumstances more efficiently; considers, in this regard, that adequate emergency measures still need to be taken, in coordination with other actions, to alleviate the European crises, especially in the areas of social policy (poverty, unemployment and inequalities), agriculture and migration, along with measures to ensure that Parliament’s role in implementing and adopting the MFF is fully respected and that the Council does not act without Parliament’s consent;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas the Commission willas obliged to present its proposal for the future post-2020 MFF before 1 January2018 as stipulated in the Article 25 of the Council Regulation No 1311/2013laying down the multiannual financial framework (MFF) for the years 2014-2020 and whereas the Commission will now present its package of proposals on the post-2020 MFF, including future own resources, only in May 2018, which is expected to be followed shortly afterwards by draft legislative proposals for the financial programmes and instruments;
Amendment 29 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. States that cohesion policy should remain the EU’s main public investment policy, but that more needs to be done to highlight the major role of cohesion policy in achieving the EU’s political objectives;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recalls Parliament’s concern that the financial complexity resulting from the interactions of more than a thousand financial engineering instruments, trust funds and of numerous financial mechanisms supporting Union policies that are not recorded in the union balance sheet, constitutes a major reason why democratic accountability of the galaxies of budgets may be impossible;
Amendment 31 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1 a. Calls on the Commission to present its proposals for the future MFF and the post-2020 cohesion policy package without delay, and insists on a prompt start of negotiations in order to ensure the timely implementation of the ESIF in the post-2020 programming period;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Regrets the delay in the presentation by the Commission of its proposal for the post-2020 MFF which creates the prospect of a significant delay in the negotiations and adoption of the corresponding legislation on MFF and the financial programmes and instruments, thus endangering their timely implementation in the post-2020 period;
Amendment 36 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Calls, therefore, for the MFF to provide for sufficient funds for cohesion policy post-2020, striking a good balance between investments in citizens and investments for citizens, and ensuring that the EU’s political goals can be reachbetween the three dimensions of cohesion policy - economic, social and territorial - as well as ensuring that the EU’s political goals can be reached; believes that the share of the MFF for cohesion should be increased and that current commitments should not be reduced;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Welcomes the discussion about the next MFF as an opportunity to prepare the ground for a stronger and more sustainable Europe through one of its most tangible instruments, the Union budget; strongly insists that the new MFF does not reproduce the current insufficient financing for the main political priorities of the EU, thus being in contradiction with the Treaty provision requiring the Union to pursue its objectives as defined in art 3 TUE by appropriate means; in contrast, calls for a new quality of the MFF and for adequate resources providing for sustainable development, social progress and better life for citizens; believes that the next MFF should be embedded in a broader strategy and narrative for the future of Europe;
Amendment 45 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Encourages the Commission to examine the possibility of changfurther enhance and streamlinge the structure of theand composition of EU expenditure in thes on Cohesion Ppolicy since a majority of the original Union objec order to successfully tackle the growing disparitives can be considered achieved, and since more efficient results could be gained with emphasis on naturd cleavages between urban and rural areas, top and bottom social incompetition on development and modernisation, instead of sustaining the ce groups and differing Member States, it being of decisive importance to urrgent framework for, and practices of, mere redistributive financial support; is, however, of the opinion that the economic, social and territorial Cohesion Policies of the Union could still provide support for the less developed regions, and for better cross- border cooperation, but should focus even more on growth, innovation, mobility, climate change, energy and environmental transition, while applying the same criteria to the whole of the EUly reverse the processes of deepening divergences, so as to overcome spreading fragmentation and ensure the future robust development of the EU as a democratic, strong and cohesive community on nations founded on the overarching principle of solidarity;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls on the Commission, when presenting its proposal for the post-2020 MFF, to accompany it with a detailed outline of the strategic priorities upon which the draft MFF is build; such priorities should be subject of consideration in the course of elaborating a comprehensive Europe 2030 Strategy, which in turn to be examined in-depth by the European Parliament before finalization of thepost-2020 MFF package by the Council;
Amendment 51 #
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 do, however, have an important role to play in certain cases; stresses that in the event of a reduction in the EU’s budgets, greater focus on the EU’s core goals is required, with particular emphasis on stimulating growth and job creation and reducing inequalities and regional disparities;
Amendment 70 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. Is of the opinion that no macroeconomic or fiscal ex-ante conditionalities should be allowed in the post-2020 cohesion policy;
Amendment 71 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 b (new)
Paragraph 4 b (new)
4 b. Insists that cohesion funding should be used for cohesion policy priorities and objectives, rather than for tackling challenges in other policy areas, such as managing migration flows or the common defence policy;
Amendment 79 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Insists that the aim of the EU budget should be to achieve the political objectives as defined in a EU political strategy and reflected in the headings of the MFF, and that the budget lines should be presented in this framework and regrouped under programme statements pursuing these objectives rather than listed by activities; stresses as well that enhanced cooperation expenditures should be included in the EU budget;
Amendment 83 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Recalls that in its resolution accompanying the discharge 20156 , Parliament called on the Commission to fundamentally reconsider the design and delivery mechanism for the ESIFs and to foresee, for the next programming period, more manageable and measurable performance indicators; insists that all future expenditure should focus on programmes and instruments, with proven EU added value, designed to deliver results at minimum cost, and that performance should be at the centre of the next generation of all programmes and schemes; __________________ 6 See paragraph 190 of the resolution of 27 April 2017 with observations forming an integral part of the decisions on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2015, Section III – Commission and executive agencies (Texts adopted, P8_TA(2016)0309).
Amendment 91 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Stresses the importance of regional cross-border initiatives in promoting economic growth and job creation;
Amendment 92 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Believes that those policy fields likely to suffer most significantly from the budget gap resulting from Brexit should be protected from major setbacks in order to prevenot tohe destabilise in an excessive wayzation of any current economic, social or administrative framework; points in particular to the need to secure the Union’s resources in the fields of growth, jobs, social cohesion, research, development and innovation in order to enhance the Union’s global leadership; calls on the Commission, in this regard, to examine carefully the consequences of different Brexit scenarios when preparing the MFF proposal and its impact assessment;
Amendment 98 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Points out, however, that when filling the budgetary gap, the main objective should not be to increase the share of public funding, but to provide a more sustainable financial basis for all policy fields and to mobilmaintain and further improve the balance between public funding and mobilisation of private resources in order to successfully address priority EU policy objectives together with ensuring a more sustainable financial basise therough maximum leverage of private resources; calls, in this regard, for an enhanced paradigm shift infor EU expenditure froms combining grant-based subsidising towards a mowith increased financial instrument-oriented approaches in areas where financial, instrument- oriented systems can bring added value, provided that further measures are taken for materially reducing the level of errors associated with such instruments;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Stresses that the policies for combating poverty and social exclusion have been significantly weakened by the policy of budgetary constraints, urges for continuation of these policies with adequate resources under the next MFF in order to achieve their targets and to lead to tangible results;
Amendment 105 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7 a. Deems it necessary that all EU structural and investment funds be continued post-2020, including the Cohesion Fund and the European Social Fund;
Amendment 305 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 62
Paragraph 62
62. Calls on the Commission to simplify and harmonise the rules governing the use of financial instruments in the next MFF in order to maximise their efficient application; considers the option oftakes note that the Commission may propose a single fund that would integrate financial instruments at EU level that are centrally managed under such programmes as the Connecting Europe Facility (CEF), Horizon 2020, COSME, Creative Europe and the Employment and Social Innovation programme (EaSI) on the one hand and the European Fund for Strategic Investments (EFSI) on the other, a proposal to be discussed further; is of the opinion that such an umbrella solution should provide for a clear structure for the choice of different types of financial instruments for different policy areas and types of act; warns that such a proposal would need thorough discussions; underlines, however, that such a fund could never integrate financial instruments managed by Member States under cohesion policy;
Amendment 355 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 70
Paragraph 70
70. Calls, furthermore, for a greater focus on implementing research and innovation through joint undertakings and for supporting investment in key technologies to close the investment gap in innovation; emphasises that the increase in funds must be coupled with a simplification of funding procedures; welcomes the Commission’s efforts in this respect and insists that these should continue under the next programming period; together with efforts to introduce mechanisms ensuring balanced participation of stakeholders from all Member States;
Amendment 376 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 72
Paragraph 72
72. Reiterates its strong commitment to EFSI that aims at mobilising EUR 500 billion in new investment in the real economy under the current MFF; believinvites, that EFSI has already delivered a powerful and targeted boost to economic sectors that are conducive to sustainable growth and jobs; welcomes, therefore, the Commission’s intention to puterefore, the Commission to overcome the shortcomings of EFSI implementation in its first stage and to improve it when putting forward a legislative proposal for the continuation and improvement of this investment scheme under the new MFF in order to boost its role as an important instrument for decreasing structural inequalities and enhancing convergence and cohesion; stresses that any legislative proposal should be based on the conclusions of a Commission review and independent evaluation;
Amendment 385 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 73
Paragraph 73
73. Insists on the importance of the MFF for sectors relying on long-term investment, such as the transport sector; highlights that the transport infrastructures are the backbone of the single market and the basis for sustainable growth and job creation; notes that accomplishing a single European transport area connected to neighbouring countries requires major transport infrastructure especially in peripheral and less developed regions and must be treated as a key priority in terms of thefor EU’s competitiveness and for economic, social and territorial cohesion, including for peripheral and insular areas; considers, therefore, that the next MFF should provide for sufficient funding for projects that contribute in particular to the completion of the TEN-T core network and its corridors, which should be further extended; recognizes the importance of the Cohesion Fund in this regard and insists on its continuation in the new MFF; stresses that an updated and more effective CEF programme should cover all modes of transport and focus on interconnections and the completion of the network in peripheral areas while using common standards;
Amendment 523 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83
Paragraph 83
83. Is strongly committed to the commitment arising from art 9 TFEU for the delivery of a Social Europe and the implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights, and points to the existing instruments contributing to these goals, notably the ESF, the Youth Employment Initiative, the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived, the EGF and EaSI; believes that they should be safeguarded in the next MFF; highlights that such implementation requires that social policies are properly financed, bearing in mind that, at present, expenditure on social matters is insufficient. Underlines the consequent need of increased funding of existing instruments contributing to these goals, notably the ESF, the Youth Employment Initiative, the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived, the EGF and EaSI; believes that they should be safeguarded and reinforced in the next MFF available to all Member States and reinforced as needed, including as regards education, training and life-long learning, active support to employment, protection from child poverty and socio- economic integration of refugees; reiterates its view that the social impact of economic adjustment within the euro area could be alleviated and upward economic and social convergence strengthened through adequate financing so as to avoid a further deterioration as regards inequalities and the growth potential of Member States and to cope with severe macroeconomic shocks while increasing the competitiveness and stability of Member States’ economies;
Amendment 530 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 a (new)
Paragraph 83 a (new)
83a. Is deeply concerned regarding the particularly acute problem of child poverty afflicting up to 25 million children in the EU (over 26.4 % of the population aged 0 to 17 reaching almost 50 % in some Member States) belonging to families that suffer daily from lack of sufficient income and basic services, such as food supplies, housing, education and healthcare; reiterates its call on the Commission and all Member States for the establishment of a special fund dedicated to the Child Guarantee, placing children at the centre of expanding poverty alleviation policies and ensuring the corresponding resources for full implementation of the necessary policy measures, including helping parents to get out of social exclusion and unemployment through targeted interventions;
Amendment 536 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 b (new)
Paragraph 83 b (new)
83b. Highlights that the ESF in particular should expand its support to the development of social dialogue, namely by improving the capacity building of social partners including European sectoral and intersectoral levels and that this commitment should become compulsory for Member States in all the regions of the EU;
Amendment 537 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 83 c (new)
Paragraph 83 c (new)
83c. Considers that the allocation for the European Social Fund should be sufficiently increased so that it is able both to successfully meet the new challenges such as those connected with the timely implementation of the European Pillar of Social Rights, as well as to continue promoting the creation of decent jobs, skills development and gender equality, encouraging social investments in quality social services and the social economy, combating poverty, inequalities, discrimination and demographic change; insists that the autonomy of the ESF be maintained in order for it to further contribute to economic and social cohesion;