8 Amendments of Stéphane BIJOUX related to 2023/2121(INI)
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 14 a (new)
Citation 14 a (new)
– having regard to its resolution of 14 September 2021 towards a stronger partnership with the EU outermost regions,
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
Paragraph 1
1. Insists that due to its regional focus, strategic planning and effective implementation model , cohesion policy should remain the EU’s main instrument for reducing disparities and stimulating regional growth and continuehas not been intended to be a key contributor to supporting recovery from symmetric and asymmetric shocks; calls for a clear demarcation between cohesion policy and other instruments in order to avoid overlaps and competition between EU instruments; believes that there must be an increase in the overall cohesion budget and in the MFF’s share of the policy compared to the 2021-2027 programming period;
Amendment 118 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3 a. Is of the view that simplification should be one of the key drivers of the future cohesion policy; considers it necessary to increase the use of Simplified Cost Options (SCOs), streamline public procurement procedures, improve the articulation of cohesion policy with State aid rules, implement the single audit principle and identify “one-stop shops” for potential beneficiaries; invites the Member States to avoid over-regulation in order to ensure legal stability for the beneficiaries;
Amendment 171 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls for cohesion policy to include a stronger urbanboth urban and rural dimensions through designated investments in urban and rural areas as well as stronger links between urban and rural projects and investments; calls for the proportion of national ERDF allocations for urban development to be increased from 8 % to 12 %to earmark funding for rural areas and regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps in the same way as 8 % of the cohesion policy funds are earmarked for the development of urban areas; calls for this funding to be co-programmed with local authorities and for their benefit; underlines in this context that administrative capacity is essential for ensuring that managing bodies and local authorities acquire technical knowledge on climate change which they can use for urban and rural planning and urban and rural management; is convinced that this will lead to better design and evaluation of project proposals, more effective allocation of resources and satisfactory budgetary implementation without significant risk of decommitments; acknowledges that integrated territorial investmentdevelopment tools have a fundamental role in quality implementation and absorption of resources;
Amendment 185 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Calls for the reduction of thematic concentration requirements in order to allow for more flexibilityflexibility at programme level in order to allow for more specific and targeted measures and a differentiated and territorial approach to cater for local needs, following the principle of place- based policy in the EU’s territorial investments; underscores that thematic concentrationsflexibility should be adapgranted to the way regions and cities operate in practical terms, from programming and reprogramming to implementation and closure; is certain that the key principle should be a tailor-made investment approach geared to specific needs on the ground;
Amendment 192 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Calls for initial allocations and co- financing rates to be assessed on the basis of NUTS 3 (nomenclature of territorial units for statistics) in order for funding to be directed to where it is most needed and to avoid pockets of underdevelopment from arising ; underlines that such a shift should take into account possible negative effects on EU financing for larger urban areas; stresses that this is necessary in order not to stall the development trajectory of metropolitan areas that were previously supported more intensively by cohesion policyto address intraregional disparities by paying more attention to the diversity of territories in order for funding to be directed to where it is most needed and to avoid pockets of underdevelopment from arising;
Amendment 200 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that for the allocation of funds for local projects, the focus should be on a smaller number oflocal and regional authorities combine projects with higher budget, with common benefit projects, instead of scattering the limited resources across a high number of low budget projects; calls for guidance and planning support to avoid decommitments and repurposingand small scale projects to bring cohesion policy closer to EU citizens; calls for guidance and planning support to avoid decommitments and repurposing; highlights the importance to strengthen the bottom-up approach to territorial development which is a vehicle for social innovation and capacity building, empowering citizens to take ownership of the development of their territories through the design and implementation of strategies and projects;
Amendment 225 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
Paragraph 14
14. Encourages multi-citysynergies between projects and collaboration agreements in order to harness pooled capacities and economies of scale in EU investments in infrastructure, climate change and the green transition; believes that this process should lead to a greater sense of ownership of projects and the consolidation of investments, instead of fragmentation and lack of synergies; highlights the added value of territorial cooperation in general and cross-border cooperation in particular;