19 Amendments of Hugues BAYET related to 2016/2148(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Welcomes the significant contribution made by the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESI funds) to the construction of an efficient and safe European transport network; Stresses the importance of synergies between the various funds;need for better synergies in implementing EU funds to promote combined funding and to increase the leverage effect of EU financial instruments in the transport sector. Draws the attention to the possibility of establishing joint monitoring committees to strengthen the synergies between the ESI Funds, the Connecting Europe Facility, the European fund for strategic investments and the H2020 program in the transport sector.
Amendment 15 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Calls for debt and deficit calculations not to factor in public investment carried out by Member States’ public operators, as is the case with the Juncker Plan, particularly in view of the impact of the new ESA 2010 system of accounts, which is preventing Member States from putting up co-financing for projects eligible for structural funding (in particular under the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Youth Employment Initiative) and thus from using this important source of funding to help find a way out of the economic crisis and kick- start growth and employment;
Amendment 18 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Stresses that ESI funds should focus on sustainable transport infrastructures. Underlines that Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans play a significant role in implementing ESI funds and achieving objective 4 of the Common Strategic Framework (CSC), "Supporting the shıft towards a low- carbon economy in all sectors".
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)
Paragraph 2 b (new)
2b. Calls on the Commission to earmark appropriate funding for sustainable urban mobility under the European Regional and Development Fund.
Amendment 23 #
3. Takes note of the results envisaged in PAs and OPs, and expects Member States and regions to take the right path in order to achieve cohesion policy objectives; calls for continued structural fund investment in transition regions so as not to detract from what has been achieved by the resources and efforts already deployed;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. whereas the purpose of assistance must be to improve social well-being by helping to increase employment rates, combating exclusion and poverty and promoting high levels of social protection and high-quality health and education services.
Amendment 40 #
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 is needed more than ever; to regain the trust of its citizens, the EU must initiate adjustment processes whilst meeting the requirements laid down in Article 9 TFEU. In particular, that should involve a proactive public investment policy.
Amendment 42 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Calls for debt and deficit calculations not to factor in public investment carried out by Member States’ public operators, particularly in view of the impact of the new ESA 2010 system of accounts, which is preventing Member States from putting up co-financing for projects eligible for structural funding (in particular under the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Youth Employment Initiative) and thus from using this important source of funding to help find a way out of the economic crisis and kick- start growth and employment;
Amendment 48 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Calls on the Commission to take into account the main features of long- term investments in transport infrastructures. Underlines that investments in sustainable transport infrastructures require a substantial public intervention and might be less attractive for the private sector as they yield too low or uncertain return on investment.
Amendment 49 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)
Paragraph 5 b (new)
5b. Recalls that the leverage effect of the EU financial instruments is very low, or non-existent in the transport sector. Therefore, stresses that grants are the most appropriate instruments for supporting transport infrastructures under ESI funds.
Amendment 51 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Recalls that funds allocated to financing the 'Connecting Europe' facility were depleted in order to recapitalise the European Fund for Strategic Investments; expresses hope that these funds will be used to finance infrastructurrecalls that transport remains a top priority of the European Fund for Strategic Investments. Draws the attention to the possibility of combining EFSI financial instruments with ESI funds on one projects;.
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Underlines the need to enhance coordination and to enable and optimise synergies between ESIF and other Union programmes in order to achieve greater impact and efficiency.; calls for continued structural fund investment in transition regions so as not to undermine what has been achieved by the resources and efforts already deployed;
Amendment 66 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Insists that cohesion policy should continue to have thematic focus, while allowing for some degree of flexibility in order to take on board the specific needs of each region; calls for continued structural fund investment in transition regions so as not to undermine what has been achieved by the resources and efforts already deployed;
Amendment 72 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that major administrative barriers to accessing European Structural and Investment Funds exist, particularly for SMEs; Underlines that excluding ESI funds from the state aid rules will significantly facilitate the access to ESI funds for SMEs and local entrepreneurships which are facing major administrative barriers.
Amendment 78 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Underlines that the thematic concentration establishing ESI funds' investments priorities might limit the capacity of local authorities to invest in transport infrastructures, especially in the more developed regions where at least 80 % of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) resources at national level shall be allocated to two or more of the thematic objectives 1, 2, 3 and 4 of the Common Strategic Framework. Therefore calls on the Commission to allow more flexibilities for regions to decide on which priorities they want to focus. Stresses that objective 7 of the CSC, "Promoting sustainable transport and removing bottlenecks in key network infrastructures", should be taken into account as key action of the ERDF.
Amendment 86 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls for neutralisation in the calculation of debt and deficit in public investment carried out by Member States' public operators under the ESI funds, particularly with regard to the impact of the new ESA 2010 system of accounts, which prevents Member States from excluding their co-financing share to the ESI Funds in the calculation of their budgetary deficit and thus using these funds to escape from the economic crisis and re-launch growth and employment;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. WelcomesTakes note of the fact that more than two thirds of the Country Specific Recommendations (CSRs) that were adopted in 2014 are relevant to cohesion policy investments and have been taken into account in Member States’ programming priorities;
Amendment 119 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Favours the establishment of a balanced link between cohesion policy and the European Semester, as both work towards achieving the same aims under the Europe 2020 Strategy, particularly in order to prioritise investment, growth, employment and socially progressive policies;
Amendment 166 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Calls for debt and deficit calculations not to factor in public investment carried out by Member States’ public operators, as is the case with the Juncker Plan, particularly in view of the impact of the new ESA 2010 system of accounts, which is preventing Member States from putting up co-financing for projects eligible for structural funding (in particular under the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Youth Employment Initiative) and thus from using this important source of funding to help find a way out of the economic crisis and kick- start growth and employment;