63 Amendments of Stéphane BIJOUX related to 2022/2032(INI)
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)
Citation 7 a (new)
— having regard to Regulation (EU) 2021/1755 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 6 October 2021 establishing the Brexit Adjustment Reserve1a, _________________ 1a OJ L 357, 8.10.2021, p. 1.
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 9 a (new)
Citation 9 a (new)
— having regard to the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 May 2018 on a mechanism to resolve legal and administrative obstacles in a cross-border context (COM(2018)0373),
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 11 a (new)
Citation 11 a (new)
— having regard to the Commission communication of 3 May 2022 entitled ‘Putting people first, securing sustainable and inclusive growth, unlocking the potential of the EU’s outermost regions’ (COM(2022)198),
Amendment 11 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 21 a (new)
Citation 21 a (new)
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B
Recital B
B. whereas during the pandemic, the risk of unemployment and the gender gap were particularly pronounced in less developed EU regions; whereas in less developed regions, the gender employment gap is almost twice than in more developed regions (17 vs 9 percentage points);
Amendment 20 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital C
Recital C
C. whereas cohesion policy, even though it is not a crisis instrument, helps to respond effectively to asymmetric shocks such as the current refugee crisis caused by the Russian invasion of Ukraine; whereas cohesion policy, in its nature and identity, is a long-term investment policy;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas while developed eastern EU regions have been catching up with the rest of the EU, several middle-income and less developed regions are in economic stagnation or decline, suggesting that they are in a development trap; whereas these regions have experienced growth in GDP per head far below the EU average, productivity growth and employment creation lower than in other regions; whereas regions in a development trap have smaller manufacturing sectors than those in regions with a lower or higher GDP per head and their innovation and education systems and institutional quality are not strong enough to be competitive at the global level;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
Recital E
E. whereas convergence has been driven by strong growth in less developed regions, but the benefits they derive from lower costs and the returns on their investments are likely to diminish over time; whereas less developed regions will need to boost education and training, increase investments in research and innovation, and improve the quality of their institutions to avoid falling into a development trap;
Amendment 31 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital G
Recital G
G. whereas infrastructure quality, provision of services, access to healthcare and transports and mobility solutions differs vastly between urban and rural regions;
Amendment 38 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas demographic decline is more pronounced in rural regions, and 50 % of the EU population will be living in a region with a shrinking and ageing population by 2050; whereas these developments are likely to affect growth potential, skills development and access to services in rural areas; whereas Eurobarometers show that people in rural areas are more likely to feel that their voice does not count and distrust the EU;
Amendment 41 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital I
Recital I
I. whereas cohesion policy is of paramount importance in government capital investment, providing more than half of total public investment funding in some Member States; whereas the support provided by ESI funds should be additional to, and not replace, public expenditure by Member States;
Amendment 46 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital K
Recital K
K. whereas the regional innovation divide has grown and education and skills gaps between more and less developed regions are often wide; whereas skills endowments are concentrated especially in capital regions and a large urban-rural divide has emerged;
Amendment 49 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital L
Recital L
L. whereas disparities remain in the speed of the digital transition across Europe; whereas very high-speed connections are only accessible to two out of three city residents and one out of six rural residents;
Amendment 53 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M
Recital M
M. whereas significant progress has been made in improving employment and social inclusion, but regional disparities remain larger than before the 2008 financial crisis; whereas cohesion policy should provide efficient responses for tackling poverty and social exclusion, creating employment and growth, promoting investment in education, health, research and innovation, fighting climate change and tackling demographic challenges; whereas cohesion policy can only fulfil all these tasks if it is embedded in solid funding;
Amendment 60 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital M a (new)
Recital M a (new)
Ma. whereas governance in the EU is improving overall, but disparities remain between and within Member States, and the role and the capacities of sub-national governments remain unequal; whereas the rule of law has deteriorated over time in several Member States;
Amendment 67 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Is convinced that cohesion policy can only continue to play its present role as a vector for investment and job creation, an instrument to reduce regional and intraregional disparities and a solidarity mechanism for all EU regions if it has solid and adequate funding; stresses that this implies providing at least for the same level of funding as in the 2021-2027 financial period, topped up with the Just Transition Fund (JTF) II budgetary resources; ; recalls that new challenges need fresh money and asks, when relevant, to top up cohesion policy with new budgetary resources to allow Member States and regional authorities to address the different challenges and crises affecting the European Union;
Amendment 69 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Is convinced that cohesion policy can only continue to play its present role as a vector for investment and job creation and a solidarity mechanism for all EU regions if it has solid funding; stresses that this implies providing for the same level of funding as in the 2021-2027 financial period, topped up with the Just Transition Fund (JTF) II budgetary resources;
Amendment 75 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. Underlines that the cohesion policy has shown to be a modern and flexible tool, which can be quickly deployed in emergency situation; recalls, however, the nature and the traditional role of the cohesion policy as a long-term investment policy supporting structural interventions; stresses that the role of cohesion policy in emergency management should not erode the very identity of this policy nor harm its structural and long-term objectives;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that delays in the multiannual financial framework (MFF) negotiations lead to considerable delays in the programming period; calls on the Commission, therefore, to explore legal solutions to speed up the negotiation process and eventually consider creating two distinct parts within the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR), namely the content-related part (political) and the MFF-related part (financial resources), for the programming period post-2027; believes that the content-related part should be negotiated and concluded before the MFF-related part, to allow for the management authorities to start preparing the partnership agreements and programmes in a timely manner; insists, however, on the importance for Member States and regional authorities to have a clear vision on their financial envelope in order to make political choices and identify investment priorities, and for Council committees responsible for cohesion funds and budgetary resources to ensure a smooth cooperation under the comitology procedure;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the Commission’s introduction of the JTF to support regions facing challenges in their transition towards carbon neutrality; calls on the Commission to draw lessons from the implementation of the JTF; asks for a JTF II, which should be fully integrated into the CPR, to be established in the post- 2027 programming period, while applying shared management and partnership principles; believes that regions with high CO² per capita, as well as industries in transition, should have access to this fund; calls for this new JTF to differentiate between climate mitigation and adaptation; stresses that a certain proportion of funding should be allocated to the transition, in a socially just way, and to the reduction of the EU’s carbon footprint;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Welcomes the Commission’s introduction of the JTF to support regions facing challenges in their transition towards carbon neutrality; calls on the Commission to draw lessons from the implementation of the JTF; asks for a JTF II, which should be fully integrated into the CPR, to be establisheto continue supporting territories to achieve the green transition in a socially equal manner and fin the post- 2027 programming period, while applying shared management and partnership principles; believes that regions with high CO² per capita, as well as industries in transition, should have access to this fund; calls for this new JTF to differentiate between climate mitigation and adaptation; stresses that a certain proportion of funding should be allocated to the transition, in a socially just way, and to the reduction of the EU’s carbon footprint; ancing their efforts to address climate change and strengthen resilience to climate risks, advance the energy transition and provide for a sustainable economy; underlines the importance to draw lessons from the programming period 2021-2027 to explore different solutions to design a cohesion policy which makes a greater contribution to green transition, such as a revision of the thematic concentration, the continuation of JTF fully integrated into the CPR, or the creation of a new fund for the adaptation of regions to climate change; emphasizes, however, the need to design a simple architecture of the future cohesion policy post 2027 and avoid the tendency to multiply the funds;
Amendment 108 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
Amendment 109 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Maintains that an unallocated flexibiTakes note that, even though cohesion politcy reserve of 15 % of the total allocation for cohesion pois not a crisis instrument, a certain degree of agility and flexibilicty instrumentof its rules should be put in placemaintained to strengthen regions’ resilience and responsiveness, enabling them to address new and upcoming challenges and absorb asymmetric shocks; recalls that this new added value should contribute to preserving a strong cohesion policy in the post-2027 MFF and not making it vulnerable to budgetary cuts or weakening reforms;
Amendment 112 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Stresses that the 8th Cohesion Report proposes the new principle of “do no harm to cohesion”, meaning no action should hamper the convergence process or contribute to regional disparities; believes that this principle should be further developed and integrated in policy making; calls on the Commission and the co-legislators to turn this concept into a reality in legislative terms and ensure that EU policies have a positive effect on cohesion;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
Amendment 122 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
Paragraph 6 – introductory part
6. Proposes that the European Regional Development Fund and ESF+ resources for the ‘Investment for jobs and growth’ goal should be allocated among the following two categories of NUTS-2 regions:Takes note of the recent changes applied to the different categories of NUTS-2 regions under the 2021-2027 programming period, especially the extension of the category of the transition regions (GDP per head between 75%- 100% of the EU-27 average); invites the Commission to assess the impact of these changes on the allocation of the European Regional Development Fund and ESF+ resources for the ‘Investment for jobs and growth’ goal during the current programming period with the aim of drawing lessons for the design of the future cohesion policy;
Amendment 125 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – point a
Paragraph 6 – point a
Amendment 127 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 – point b
Paragraph 6 – point b
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Believes that there should only be two types of region; notes that most of the currentHighlights the importance to draw particular attention to the category of transition regions, especially because they seem stuck in a ‘development trap’ due to the following reasons: growth in GDP per head, between 2001 and 2019, far below the EU average; productivity growth and employment creation lower than in other regions; manufacturing sectors smaller trhansitional those in regions will be covered by the newly established JTF IIth a lower or higher GDP per head; innovation and education systems and institutional quality not strong enough to be competitive at the global level;
Amendment 141 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
Amendment 145 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – introductory part
Paragraph 8 – introductory part
8. Believes, thatTakes note of the recent changes applied to the co-financing rate for the ‘Investment in jobs and growth’ goal at the level of each priority should not be higher than:under the 2021-2027 programming period; invites the Commission to assess the impact of these changes and insists on the need to increase the co-financing rate, especially for transition and more developed regions;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – point a
Paragraph 8 – point a
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 – point b
Paragraph 8 – point b
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Invites to pursue reflection on the importance of indicators complementary to GDP in order to give a more precise picture of the socio-economic situation of the regions; supports, in this regard, the use of social, environmental and demographic criteria, in order to better identify the challenges and needs, including at sub-regional level;
Amendment 158 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)
Paragraph 9 b (new)
9b. Suggests opening a reflection on the contribution of cohesion policy to the achievement of the long-term EU strategic objectives, especially in light of the new challenges ahead; believes that the green and digital transition remains major challenges on which we should focus our investments in order to avoid new disparities; invites the Commission, the Member States and the managing authorities to strengthen the dialogue and join forces in the identification of the strategic objectives on which the future cohesion is expected to contribute;
Amendment 162 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that ‘rust belts’ still exist in most Member States; believes that, to address the potentially negative impact of the transition of old industries such as steel and aluminium and to support the development of the regions affected,urges to support the industrial transition of these territories and address its potentially negative impact making use of the cohesion fund and the JTF II resources should be directed towardsand by creating smart specialisation strategies tailored to each of the regions in industrial transition, fostering innovation-led growth and ensuring the spread of growth benefits;
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Notes that ‘rust belts’ still exist in most Member States; believes that, to address the potentially negative impact of the transition of old industries such as steel and aluminium and to support the development of the regions affected, JTF II resources should be directed towards creating smart specialisation strategies tailored to each of the regions in industrial transition, fostering innovation-led growth and ensuring the spread of growth benefits;
Amendment 169 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Stresses the importance of supporting rural areas by valuing their diversity and potential, improving transport connectivity and, high-speed broadband, the provision of services, economic diversification and job creation, and helping them meet challenges such as rural desertification, depopulation, ageing and rural abandonment, the decline of city- centre communities and insufficient healthcare; asks, therefore, that at least 5 % of the ERDF resources at national level under the Investment for jobs and growth goal, other than for technical assistance, are allocated to integrated territorial development in disadvantaged non-urban areas, suffering from natural, geographical or demographic handicaps;
Amendment 187 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Notes that only 11.5 % of people living in rural areas work in agriculture, forestry and fisheries21 ; calls, therefore, for the reintegratinvites the Commission to assess the consequences of the exclusion of the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) underfrom the strategic framework of the CPR; emphasises that being part of the cohesion policy fundsthe multi-fund approach strengthens possibilities for investments in rural areas beyond agriculture; _________________ 21 European Commission, JRC Technical Reports, Territorial Facts and Trends in the EU Rural Areas within 2015-2030, 2018.
Amendment 191 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Is convinced that the role of small cities, towns and villages should be bolstered in order to support local economies and address demographic challenges; reaffirms the importance of urban-rural linkages and of the development of strategies based on functional areas with particular attention to small and medium-sized towns with the aim of preventing rural areas from shrinking; underlines the importance of implementing tailor-made territorial approaches and investing especially on the smart villages initiative with the aim of revitalising rural services through digital and social innovation; backs, therefore, the reinforcement of the second pillar of the common agricultural policy, the EAFRD;
Amendment 199 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. NHighlights the importance to strengthen the bottom-up approach to rural and local development, which is a vehicle for social innovation and capacity building, empowering rural citizens to take ownership of their area's development through the design and implementation of strategies and projects; notes that the potential that exists at local level could be better mobilised by strengthening and facilitating community- led local development (CLLD); takes the view that CLLD should be mandatory for Member States;
Amendment 204 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Stresses the importance of synergies between different funding tools, such as EARDF, ERDF, ESF+ and EMFAF, to channel an adequate level of funding towards rural areas through a multi-fund approach; regrets that, during the 2014-2020 programming period, only a quarter of local development projects carried out by local actors integrated more than a funding tool; calls on the Commission to considerably reduce the administrative complexity which the managing authorities have encountered in implementing the multi-fund approach;
Amendment 206 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)
Paragraph 14 b (new)
14b. Highlights the valuable contribution to rural development delivered by actions under the Leader programme, co-financed by the EARDF, which aims to engage local actors in the design and delivery of strategies, decision- making and resource allocation for the development of their rural areas; calls on the Commission and the Member States to reinforce the Leader programme by guaranteeing a high level of autonomy of the Local Action Groups regarding their constitution (no top-down design of areas and villages to be regrouped in a LAG but complete autonomy to the villages to gather and join forces in a LAG) and their decision making, reducing the administrative burden on local authorities and simplifying the access, promoting the local ownership of community-led development projects, and encouraging participation in local action groups;
Amendment 208 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes with concern the demographic challenges faced by the EU, such as an ageing population, the depopulation of rural and remote areas, and migratory flows and the arrival of refugees; highlights the potential of rural areas as spaces to foster inclusion and integration of the most vulnerable groups with specific needs, such as persons with disabilities, migrants, including seasonal migrants, refugees and minorities; encourages Member States to design and implement specific measures to promote their training and employment and safeguard their fundamental rights; insists especially on the necessity to prepare an immediate response to the arrival of Ukrainian refugees in order to ensure their quick and easy integration;
Amendment 214 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Welcomes the integration of datas on ORs into the statistic studies of the 8th Cohesion Report implementing an « Outermost Regions reflex » as requested by the European Parliament in its resolution of 14 September 2021; stresses that the ORs are among the poorest regions in Europe, that six of the thirty EU regions with the lowest GDP per capita are outermost regions; recalls that these regions have particularly high level of NEETs and suffer from youth unemployment, that is above 50% in the Canary Islands and Mayotte, and around 40% in Guadeloupe, Martinique and Réunion; welcomes the new initiative launched by the Commission for ORs youth and calls for more EU actions dedicated to youth training, inclusion, employment and mobility following the new communication from the Commission on the EU’s outermost regions;
Amendment 216 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Emphasises the fundamental principles of Article 174(3) TFEU and calls for greater attention to de drawn on specific territorial characteristics, such as those of regions suffering from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps, such as northernmost regions with very low population density, islands, cross-border and mountain regions; underlines the importance of designing tailor-made programmes and actions for these regions and welcomes the recent adoption of agendas and strategies covering some of them;
Amendment 217 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)
Paragraph 15 b (new)
15b. Reaffirms the importance of Article 349 TFEU, which should be used to support the development of the outermost regions, maintaining and enhancing all the derogations intended to compensate for their structural disadvantages and meeting their specific needs with tailor-made solutions; welcomes the adoption of the Commission communication entitled ‘Putting people first, securing sustainable and inclusive growth, unlocking the potential of the EU’s outermost regions’ aimed at promoting the unique assets of the outermost regions; underlines their great potential to further develop key sectors such as the blue economy, sustainable agriculture, renewable energy, space activities, research or eco-tourism;
Amendment 220 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Observes that some middle-income regions are facing a ‘middle-income trap’, often suffering from low growth, weak innovation, struggling manufacturing industries and vulnerability to shocks caused by globalisationweak competitiveness, low productivity struggling manufacturing industries, low institutional and government quality and vulnerability to shocks caused by globalisation; draws attention on the worrying aggravation of this trend and urges the Commission and the Member States to seriously address this challenge setting regions in the development trap as a core priority of their action and investment under cohesion policy;
Amendment 226 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17
Paragraph 17
17. Emphasises that these ‘middle- income trap’ regions need more investments in education; urges the Commission to define these regions and tohave differing characteristics and need tailor-made solutions to boost investments in education, human capital, research and development, innovation, upskilling of work force and public sector reforms; urges the Commission to further investigate the concept of regions in a development trap, better understand the structural factors that lead to the development trap and define these regions; calls on the Commission to provide flexibility to the Member States at programme level with the aim of urgently adopting specific and targeted measures, programmes and strategies to support these regions through a differentiated and territorial approach; asks to design and implement targeted smart specialisation strategies for the regions in a development trap and allocate higher amounts to them under the ESF+ in the next programming period;
Amendment 237 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)
Paragraph 18 a (new)
18a. Highlights the added value of territorial cooperation in general and cross-border cooperation in particular, especially in emergency situation such as the COVID-19 pandemic; asks for cooperation between regions in the framework of macro-regional strategies or sea-basin strategies to be extended and embedded in the cohesion policy; stresses the importance to remove obstacles to cross-border cooperation and emphasises that the European Cross Border Mechanism proposed by the Commission would have contributed to remove more than 50 % of the barriers; deeply regrets the fact that the legislative procedure relating to the ECBM has been blocked by the Council;
Amendment 241 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Paragraph 18 b (new)
Amendment 250 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Notes that cohesion policy reform for the financial period 2021-2027 has contributed to simplified and flexible use of funding for beneficiaries and management authorities; calls on the Commission to promote further simplification, flexibility and citizen participation; asks the Member States to provide support and training for potential beneficiaries, especially new beneficiaries of small scale projects, and bring cohesion policy close to all EU citizens, in particular through its new Policy Objective 5;
Amendment 256 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)
Paragraph 19 a (new)
19a. Invites the Member States to avoid over-regulation, make operational programmes strategic, concise and flexible documents, and make funding agreements between the managing authority and the beneficiary a tool of simplification; asks the managing authorities to include in funding agreements the information and details strictly necessary to ensure legal stability for the beneficiary, ensure they are discussed and signed in due time and before the start of the project and reduce risks related to interpretation;
Amendment 258 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 b (new)
Paragraph 19 b (new)
19b. Encourages to reduce the number of intermediate bodies involved in the management and control of cohesion funds by strengthening the coordination and competences of intermediate bodies having a critical size and identifying, where possible, one-stop-shops for beneficiaries;
Amendment 259 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 c (new)
Paragraph 19 c (new)
19c. Calls on the Commission to encourage the use of Simplified Cost Options (SCOs), including by raising the thresholds below which the use of SCOs should be compulsory; invites to speed up the implementation of the e-cohesion, stresses the potential of digitalisation as regards monitoring and reporting activities, and encourages the exchange of good practices by establishing knowledge- sharing platforms;
Amendment 262 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 d (new)
Paragraph 19 d (new)
19d. Considers it necessary to streamline public procurement procedures, reducing the burden on the compliance controls which have to be implemented by the managing authorities at project level; urges to improve the articulation of the cohesion policy with the State aid rules, introducing where possible presumption of compliance with the State aid regime, in order to place on an equal footing all EU investment policies and avoid competition between them;
Amendment 263 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 e (new)
Paragraph 19 e (new)
19e. Stresses the need to provide a framework which guarantees legal stability through simple, clear and predictable rules, particularly as regards management and auditing; asks for any retrospective application and interpretation of rules to be avoided as much as possible; suggests opening a reflection on the threshold of the total error rate for each year under which the programme's management and control system is considered to be functioning effectively and the capacity of managing authority to comply with this provision of the regulation without penalising beneficiaries; is of the view that this threshold should be raised to 5 %;
Amendment 265 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 f (new)
Paragraph 19 f (new)
19f. Observes that the control mechanism used by the Commission for funds under direct management seems much simpler; invites the Commission to improve transparency of its audit rules, strengthen the dialogue between auditors and policy makers, reduce statistical sample for audits of operations and implement the single audit principle to avoid duplication of audits and management verifications of the same expenditure; asks to make the control mechanism less burdensome, especially for small-scale projects;
Amendment 266 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 g (new)
Paragraph 19 g (new)
19g. Believes that the relationship between the Commission and the managing authorities should evolve towards a ‘contract of confidence’ built on the development and definition of objective criteria; considers it necessary to introduce a label to reward managing authorities which have demonstrated their ability to comply with the rules and reduce their rate of error; calls, in relation to monitoring and control, for greater reliance on national and regional authorities where their effectiveness has been verified;
Amendment 267 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 h (new)
Paragraph 19 h (new)
19h. Is of the view that simplification should be one of the key driver of the future cohesion policy and the reform of these provisions of the CPR should be designed and agreed in cooperation with managing authorities, involving the territories at an early stage of the reflection;
Amendment 280 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Paragraph 21 a (new)
Amendment 285 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 c (new)
Paragraph 21 c (new)
21c. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to continue making efforts in communication and visibility by improving information on operations of strategic importance and upcoming calls for proposals; welcomes the launch of the new database Kohesio and asks to make the website available in all the EU official languages as soon as possible; stresses that Kohesio should provide data on all cohesion and territorial projects, including those related to rural development, co-financed by the EARDF and under the Leader programme, and allow users to search for projects in relation to their thematic areas with the aim of providing a platform that shares good practices and promotes projects of excellence;