32 Amendments of Josianne CUTAJAR related to 2020/2087(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 2
Citation 2
— having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 of 11 November 2002 establishing the European Union Solidarity Fund and its subsequent amendments of 15 May 2014 and 20 March 20201 , _________________ 1 OJ L 311, 14.11.2002, p. 3.
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the European Union Solidarity Fund (EUSF), established by Council Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002 in order to, created following the great floods that hit Central Europe in 2002, provides financial assistance to Member States and accession countries undergoingstruck by major disasters,; whereas the EUSF represents a true European added value and the materialisation of a will, that has sometimes been lacking, to provide mu of solidarity towards the populations of the EU's regions affected by major natural assistance at Union leveldisasters;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas, in its resolution of 17 April 2020 on EU coordinated action to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and its consequences, the European Parliament pointed out that solidarity among the Member States wais not an option, but an obligation, stemming inter alia from Articles 2 and 21 of the Treaty on the European Union (TEU), and was part and parcelis a pillar of our European values, as set out in Article 3 of the TEU; whereas, in the same resolution, the European Parliament urges the Commission to strengthen all components of crisis management and disaster response;
Amendment 14 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. noting with interest that, according to a recent survey, more than two thirds of the Europeans citizens believe that the European Union should equip itself with more resources to deal with crises such as COVID-19; have more competences to deal with crises such as the crisis of the Covid-19, and more than a half believes that the EU should have more financial means to deal with these crises1a; _________________ 1a https://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/p ress-room/20201113IPR91602/eu-survey- confirms-citizens-call-for-eu-to-have- more-powers-to-tackle-pandemic
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas, so far, assistance from the Fund has concerned around a hundred natural disasters in 243 member states and 1 accession countries, totalling some EUR 6.6 billion; for interventions1a; _________________ 1a https://cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu/stories/s /An-overview-of-the-EU-Solidarity-Fund- 2002-2019/qpif-qzyn
Amendment 19 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. noting the usefulness of the EUSF, highlighted by the Commission’s evaluation, in particular as regards reducing the burden on local authorities facing significant damage as a resultf all national, regional and local authorities to support the recovery effort in the aftermath of natural disasters;
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the rate of approval of requests for assistance in the event of major disasters is 100%, while that of requests for assistance in the event of regional disasters, the most frequent category, has risen from 32% to 85% following the 2014 revision of the EUSF Regulation;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. regretting, however, that, although the reform of the regulation in 2014 contributed to a 12% reduction in the time between thethe extension from 10 to 12 weeks to allow the preparation and submission of the applications for assistance, and the relevant payment, the period required in order for the full grant to be deployed is still too long when the substantial proportion of cases still requires updates, resulting in excessive delay in finally accessing the grants; for this reason, calls on the Commission to give a simplified guidance on the application requirements aind is being urgently awaitedn so doing reducing the administrative burden;
Amendment 29 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)
Recital I a (new)
Ia. stresses that the period required in order for the full grant to be deployed could be further reduced, as EU solidarity is urgently awaited;
Amendment 30 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. regretting, likewise,s that the Fund’s assistance does notonly covers the additional costs of rebuilding energy- and resource- efficient infrastructure that isrestoration of the status quo ante of infrastructure and plants in the fields of energy, water and waste water, telecommunications, transport, health and education, while leaving aside additional costs of rebuilding more disaster-resilient and climate-resilient infrastructures, as called for in the European Green Deal, to be financed by the beneficiary State from own resources and from other Union funds, such as ERDF and Cohesion Fund;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. noting with interest that, as illustrated by the COVID-19 crisis, there is a high degree of complementarityroom for a higher level of synergies between cohesion policy instruments and the EUSF, the fund which; acknowledging that the EUSF was created to responds to natural disasters in the short and medium term, while cohesion policy (ERDF and Cohesion Fund) is geared to longer- term planning, with regard to planning and investments for civil protection and preventive and risk management infrastructure;
Amendment 36 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. welcominges the Commission’s proposal to, and subsequent exntend the scope of the EUSF to include health emergencies, so that this financial instrument can be used to provide assistance to populations affected by a pandemicring into force of Regulation (EU) 2020/461, to extend the scope of the EUSF to include major public health emergencies;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas, because of climate change, emergency situationnatural disasters are likely to intensify and multiply; highlighting, therefore, the usefulness of the budgetary mechanism of dynamic allocation, introduced in 2014, which enabled the Fund, amongst other things, to provide a record supportEUSF contribution of EUR 1.2 billion for the earthquakes in Italy in 2016- 2017;
Amendment 44 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital O a (new)
Recital O a (new)
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P
Recital P
P. whereas special attention should be paid to the outermost regions (ORs), islands – which are particularly vulnerable to disasters –, mountainous regions, sparsely populated regions and all areas that are particularly prone to the risk of natural disasters;
Amendment 48 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Expresses its deep concern that extreme wConsiders that investing in prevention and climate mitigation in line with European Green Deal, is of the utmost importance, as floods, earther evenquakes, forest fires, droughts and other natural disasters will only increase and intensify alongside climate ccan spill out of hanged;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. The EUSF is one of the most concrete expressions of the EU solidarity;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Stresses with concern that, in recent years, Europeans have had to face multiple emergenciedisasters that have devastated human lives, property, the environment and cultural heritage;
Amendment 61 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Draws attention to eventpandemics such as COVID-19, which is severely affecting all of Europe, forest fires across the continent, including in unusual places such as the Arctic, and the series of violent earthquakes in Europe, particularly in Italy in 2016-2017, causing hundreds of deaths and some EUR 22 billion in damage, and in Croatia, in March and December 2020; points out, moreover, that storms, extreme rainfall and flooding have caused considerable damage in many cities and valleys, and that increasingly violent hurricanes have caused devastation in the outermost regions, such as Hurricane Irma in 2017 in Saint-Martin, and Hurricane Lorenzo in 2019 in the Azores, which were particularly destructive;
Amendment 62 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Points out that it is vital that aid and funds be sent every more rapidlyas quickly as possible to affected regions, and that links with the Union Civil Protection Mechanism (UCPM) and the ERDF climate-change adaptation component are essential in order to create a comprehensive package; calls on the Commission to continue its work on the guidance for EUSF's simplified usage in order to facilitate actions of national, regional and local authorities;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Is of the view that the risks of natural, ecological and health disasters have now become systemic and that the least developed and most fragile territories, such as islands, are often the most affected by the impact of climate changemajor climate and public health emergencies have deeper economic and social impacts in the least developed and most fragile territories, such as islands, so more adequate measures in these territories should be taken under the EUSF;
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers it vital to improvenvest in disaster risk prevention and management in Europe by securing preventive infrastructure; recommends, in this regard, that Member States put in place, together with the Commission, disaster prevention and management plans for accurate and rapid damage assessment;
Amendment 105 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Draws particular attention to the situation of local authorities which have little experience in EU-funded projects and calls Stresses the necessity of reducing the bureaucratic burden and increasing the administrative aid to support beneficiary countries towards the creation of management and long the Commission to provierm strategies, in order them wio help reducing the increased operational support, in particular administrative supportmpacts of major natural and health disasters in these countries;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Calls on the Commission to adaptfocus the EUSF as far as possible to the regions that are the most vulnerable to natural, ecological and health disasters, particularly the ORs, islands, mountainous regions, regions that are prone to intense seismic or volcanic activity and those that are sparsely populated;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Points out that in its revised proposal of 27 May 2020 on the MFF 2021-2027 the Commission provided for a maximum annual budget of EUR 1 billion for the EUSF (in 2018 prices) and therefore notes with concern that under the agreement on the new MFF, the EUSF has been merged with the Emergency Aid Reserve (EAR) into a new ‘Solidarity and Emergency Aid Reserve’ (SEAR) package, with an overall annual budgetary allocation of EUR 1.2 billion;
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23
Paragraph 23
23. BelieveConsiders that, in the future, the EUSF budget will have to be increased in order to make iteet what is required from a real tool for EU solidarity; believes that in the short run, the Commission should prepare a proposal with more allocated resources for the EUSF budget, as it is duly justified by the broadening of the scope, in order to guarantee that there is enough budget to deal immediately with major natural and public health disasters;
Amendment 139 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Calls for the criteria for determining operations that are ‘eligible’ for assistance from the Fund to take greater account of the latest risk prevention principles, so asin order to enable countries to improve the quality of their infrastructure during reconstruction and thus beo better prepared to deal with disasters themselves to avoid future disasters by securing preventive infrastructure;
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25
Paragraph 25
25. Takes the view that operations such as ‘framework loans’, implemented with the EIB, could also be used to finance the reconstruction of more expensive, but more resilient, safer and greener infrastructure;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26
Paragraph 26
26. Calls on the Commission to strengthen and simplify the synergies between the EUSF and cohesion funds, as well as with the UCPMnion Civil Protection Mechanism, with a view to effective and structured risk management in the short, medium and long term, not only through the construction of sustainable, energy- and resource-efficient infrastructure, but also through the deployment of preventive measures;
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Paragraph 27 a (new)
27a. Highlights that the extension of the scope of the Fund, to fight impacts of the Covid-19 pandemic, has shown us that the EUSF has the capacity to be more flexible, both in scope and in its eligibility - it can provide assistance not only in cases of major natural disasters, but also in the prevention and rapid assistance to other types of major disasters, such as pandemics;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28
Paragraph 28
28. TakStresses the viewfact that thise broadening of the scope of the EUSF requires a larger must always be accompanied by a reinforcement of its budget;
Amendment 149 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to improve the visibility of the Fund’s assistance through ad hoc, targeted communication activities, and to make rapid response and delivery of aid a priority, in order specifically to highlight the Union’s added value in the event of natural and health disasters and a concrete expression of EU solidarity and its ability to put genuine mutual assistance into practice by providing significant budgetary resources;