Activities of Andrew LEWER related to 2016/2148(INI)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on investing in jobs and growth – maximising the contribution of European Structural and Investment Funds
Amendments (13)
Amendment 20 #
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, 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 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Notes that the Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) has failed to date to address the persisting problem of high levels of youth unemployment, which in several Member States remains at over 40 %; calls for an evaluation of the YEI following a fully fledged assessment of its performance; asks the Commission to take all necessary actions to ensure its continuation and its revision in order to promote the creation of new high-quality jobs and decent social protection for young peoplenote of the results of said evaluation and to ensure that further steps are taken to support the aim of reducing youth unemployment, including through encouraging exchange of best practice across Member States;
Amendment 47 #
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, whilst underlining the importance of learning from projects that fail to achieve their objectives; insists that communication on the subject of the ESI Funds should be modernised and intensified;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Highlights the fact that in order to improve communication on, and the visibility of ESI Funds, greater focus could be placed on participation by stakeholders and recipients, and on involving citizens in cohesion policy; additionally, urges the Commission to communicate more about both the achievements of cohesion policy and where lessons can be learned;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Welcomes thematic concentration, as it has turned out to be a goodproved a helpful tool for creapromoting a focused and effective policy and resulting effectiveness for s in line withe EU priorities and the EU 2020 strategy;
Amendment 56 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that the current migration crisis poses many challenges for the educational and training systems of the host Member States; calls on the EU institutions to provide, via ESIF and other Union programmes, adequate funding to host countries in order to substantially Member States with the flexibility necessary, through the ESIF and other Union programmes, to use existing funds to support the integration of refugees, migrants and asylum seekers into education and training systems;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Underlines, in particular, that consideration should be given to the circumstances of the distinctively urban or rural regions, the so-called ‘'lagging regions’' and regions with permanent natural or geographical handicaps (northernmost regions with very low population density, and cross-border, insular, mountainous or outermost regions); recalls in this context that it is important to allow sufficient flexibility for Member States and regions to support new policy challenges, such as immigration, as well as the broadly understood digital dimension of cohesion policy (including ICT and broadband access issues, which are linked to the completion of the Digital Single Market); points to the Energy Union Strategy, as the ESI Funds have an important role to play in its delivery;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Emphasises that the regulatory framework for the period 2014-2020 and the PAs have led to a stronglymore results- oriented focus in cohesion programmes;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses that state aid rules apply to ESI Funds, but not to EFSI and Horizon 2020, causing problems in increasing the level of synergy among the instruments; underlines the fact that if there is an ambition to extend EFSI or any similar types of financial instrument, the question of state aid rules needs to be adapted accordinglyfurther considered;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Supports a further balanced increase in financial instruments; asks the Commission, therefore, to come forward with incentives for managing authorities to achieve this; stresses that clear, consistent and focused rules on Financial Instruments to help simplify the preparation and implementation process for fund managers and recipients, which recognise the different development levels of financial markets across the EU's Member States, are key to improving their effective implementation;
Amendment 179 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. Recommends for the new programming period that all levels of governance work towards a system of single audit; urges the Commission to clarify the range and legal status of existing Guidance across the ESI Funds, as well as to develop, in close collaboration with Managing Authorities and all relevant audit authority tiers, a joint interpretation of audit issues; reiterates that there is a need for further steps in the area of simplification;
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. Highlights the potential European added value of ETC, whicgh should be reflected in an increased level of appropriations for this cohesion policy objective, to be introduced as soon as practicablequality ETC projects;
Amendment 215 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Welcomes the code of conduct agreed during the negotiations, which outlines the minimum standards for a well- functioning partnership; observes, however, that while the code has improved the implementation of the partnership principle in most Member States, many Member States have centralised large parts of the negotiation and implementation of the PAs and OPs; believes that over- centralisation and lack of trust can also play a role in delaying the implementation of ESI Funds, with some Member States and Managing Authorities less keen to place greater responsibility for management of EU funds in the hands of local and regional authorities;