12 Amendments of Elisabeth SCHROEDTER related to 2008/2183(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas, according to Article 158 of the Treaty, in order to strengthen its economic and social cohesion, the Community aims at reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured regions or islands, including rural areas,
Amendment 6 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital F
Recital F
F. whereas translating these priorities into operational programmes should enable regions to face the challenges of globalisation, sustainable development, structural, demographic and climate change and to strengthen sustainable development,
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas sustainability, equality between men and women and the prevention of discrimination on the basis of gender, race or ethnic origin, religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation, good governance and application of the partnership principle, together with a strong institutional and administrative capacity, are essential to the successful implementation of cohesion policy,
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Regrets that the principles of sustainability, equality of opportunity and non-discrimination, as well as partnership, have been insufficiently applied and documented in many National Strategic Reference Frameworks and Operational Programmes; is critical of the fact that the Commission has nonetheless approved Operational Programmes with such deficits and has not insisted on improvements by Member States or regions;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. AppreciatesTakes note of the efforts made by the national authorities to ensure that the average allocation of expenditure for the achievement of the Lisbon agenda constitutes 65% of the available funds in the convergence regions and 82% in the regional competitiveness and employment regions, which is in fact more than was initially requested; challenges however, whether the Lisbon earmarking contributes to reducing regional disparities;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Regrets that, of all the Structural Fund resources earmarked for transport (approx. € 82 bn), only about 31% (approx. € 24 bn) is allocated to rail transport; regards this share as too small to meet the challenges of environmental protection and combating climate change; recalls that, in its resolution on the First Railway Package, the European Parliament called for a share of at least 40% for rail transport;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Considers that measures aimed at protecting the environment, combating climate change and promoting energy efficiency should be incorpobetter integrated into all operational programmes and appreciates the commitments made byurges Member States in order address these issues, by allocating approximately one third of the total cohesion policy budget to themto ensure that these are fully integrated in project development, appraisal, implementation and monitoring; considers however that the specific allocations for combating climate change and promoting energy efficiency and renewable energies are insufficient to meet real needs; therefore urges Member States and regions to revise their Operational Programmes accordingly;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Notes that there is a substantial difference between the way EU-15 and EU-12 Member States allocated resources for this field and recognises the need of the new Member States to devote significantly more resources to achieving the EU's average environmental protection level, which, climate and biodiversity objectives as laid down isn the minimum required to ensure sustainable developmentCommunity acquis;
Amendment 27 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Considers that in time of economic crisis Member States should capitalize on the notion of achieving synergies between environmental protection and job creation stipulated in the Community Strategic Guidelines on Cohesion and allocate more resources into projects that promote green economy, green jobs and green innovation;
Amendment 28 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Considers that multi-level governance and the partnership principle are key elements of the legitimacy of operational programmes, their transparency, and their effectiveness during the programming phase and especially during the implementing process; welcomes, therefore, the efforts made by all Member States, in accordance with their specific institutional frameworks and traditions, to strengthen the partnership principle in their programmes for the current period, in accordance with Article 11 of the General Regulation on the ERDF, the ESF and the Cohesion Fund; recommends especially to the new Members States which have little experience in building up effective partnerships to consistently reinforce the partnership and transparency principle while implementing the operational programmes;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Regrets the inadequate assessment of the application of the partnership principle and the lack of attention devoted by the Commission to assessing whether Member States and regions have complied with their obligations in this respect; considers that the submission of guidelines on the application of the partnership principle would provide a necessary frame of reference both for the administrative authorities and for the Commission; calls on the Commission once again, therefore, in view of the urgency of the matter due to the ongoing monitoring and the adjustment phases of Operational Programmes, to submit these guidelines immediately and provide the Member States and regions with the necessary support in implementing them;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Misses an assessment of the coordination and complementarity of Structural Fund programmes with rural development programmes; notes that experience on the ground indicates that synergies between the two programmes are not being exploited sufficiently;