52 Amendments of Lambert van NISTELROOIJ related to 2016/2326(INI)

Ivana MALETIĆ, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Maria SPYRAKI

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas cohesion policy remains the main EU-wide investment policy for sustainable job creation and for creating smart, sustainable and inclusive growth after 2020, especially against the backdrop of a sharp decline in public and private investments in many Member States and the implications of globalisation;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas cohesion policy remains the main EU-wide investment and development policy for sustainable job creation after 2020, especially against the backdrop of a sharp decline in public and private investments in many Member States and the implications of globalisation;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Ivana MALETIĆ, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Andrey NOVAKOV, Maria SPYRAKI

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the last reform of cohesion policy in 2013 was extensive and substantial, shifting the focus of the policy towards a result-oriented approach, thematic concentration, effectiveness and efficiency on the one hand and the partnership principle, multi-level governance, coordination with other policies and smart specialization on the other;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas the renewed cohesion policy resulted in a gradual shift of focus from one based on major infrastructure- related projects towards one based on stimulating the knowledge economy and innovation;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas cohesion policy has played a vital role and has shown significant responsiveness to macroeconomic and fiscal constraints, supporting the most pressing needs and strengthening certain interventions;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas cohesion policy already addresses a very wide range of challenges and cannot be expected to tackle all new challenges the EU may face with the same – or an even smaller – budget, although the outcome may be bigger by allowing for more flexibility for Member States, regions and cities to support new policy challenges;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Krzysztof HETMAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines that growth and regional, economic and social convergence cannot be achieved without good governance, cooperation, mutual trust and the effective involvement of all partners at national, regional and local level, as is enshrined in the partnership principle (Article 5 of the Common Provisions Regulation (CPR)); reiterates that the EU cohesion policy’'s shared management arrangement provides the EU with a unique tool to directly address the concerns of citizens in relation to internal and external challenges;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Welcomes the first signs of the accelerated implementation of the operational programmes observed during the year 2016; urges the Commission to identify the causes of the delays in implementation to avoid similar problems at the beginning of the next programming period and strongly encourages all actors involved to continue to speed up their activities;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Recognises that in some Member States the partnership principle has led to closer cooperation with regional and local authorities, while there is still room for improvement in order to ensure the real and early involvement of all stakeholders; underlines that involvement of stakeholders should continue to happen in accordance with the multi-level governance approach; is of the opinion that the partnership principle should be further strengthened in the future, by for example considering to make the partnership principle and the code of conduct legally binding;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses that although cohesion policy has mitigated the impact of the ~~crisis~~recent economic and financial crisis in the EU, regional disparities and social inequalities remain high; calls for continuous action to reduce existing disparities~~, particularly in less developed regions, while maintaining support for transition and for more developed~~ and to prevent the development of new disparities in all types of regions, so as to facilitate ownership of the policy in ~~all reg~~the whole Unions;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Points out that territorial cooperation in all its forms, including macro-regional strategies, transposes the concept of political cooperation and coordination of regions and citizens across borders in the EU; underlines the merit of cohesion policy in addressing the challenges of border, outermost and northernmost sparsely populated regions;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Points out that territorial cooperation in all its forms, including macro-regional strategies, transposes the concept of political cooperation and coordination of regions and citizens across borders in the EU; underlines the merit of cohesion policy in addressing the challenges of outermost ~~and northernmost~~, peripheral and sparsely populated regions;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic objectives and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as ~~an unallocated reserve or~~ a simplification of re- programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to ~~unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region~~changing needs of each region, without impacting on the strategic focus and planning certainty of multi- annual programmes for regional and local authorities;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Underlines that the current categorisation of regions, the thematic ~~objectives~~concentration and the performance framework have demonstrated the value of cohesion policy and should be consolidated; asks the Commission to present ideas for greater flexibility, such as an unallocated reserve or a simplification of re-programming, in order to adapt ESIF investments to unforeseen events and to the specific needs of each region;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Supports the performance reserve as it encourages high level output results; Notes that the time between the performance and the opening of the reserve is too long, thereby reducing the effectiveness of the reserve; urges the Commission therefore to allow Member States to operationalize the use of the performance reserve as soon as the evaluation has been finalised;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Recognises the value of ex ante conditionalities, in particular the one on Research and Innovation Strategies for Smart Specialisation (RIS3), which enable the ESIF to support the Europe post-2020 objectives effectively without prejudice to the cohesion objectives stipulated in the Treaty;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Notes that RIS3 strengthens the regional innovation ecosystems; Is of the opinion therefore that smart specialisation should be a leading mechanism for post 2020 cohesion policy;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Opposes macro-economic conditionalities and highlights that the~~Highlights that there must be a balanced link between cohesion policy and economic governance processes ~~should be reciprocal~~ and that a greater recognition of the territorial dimension would be beneficial for the European Semester;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Points out that increasing the administrative capacities for programming, implementation and evaluation of operational programmes in the Member States and regions is crucial for timely and successful cohesion policy performance; stresses the importance in that context of the initiative Taiex Regio Peer 2 Peer which improves administrative capacity and better results for EU investments, by exchange of knowledge, good practices and practical solutions between public official involved in the management of ERDF and the Cohesion Fund;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Calls on Member States to simplify and reduce the number of national rules and guidelines and to assure that the information on EU funding is clear, concise and do not constitute unnecessary burden for the beneficiaries; calls furthermore to avoid gold-plating in the future;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Asks the Commission to reflect on solutions based on proportionality and differentiation, especially with regard to the multiple layers of audit, which should be restricted to combating fraud and corruption, and the number of controls, to a greater harmonisation between cohesion policy and competition policy, in particular state aid rules, as well as with regard to the possibility of a single set of rules for all ESI Funds;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Asks the Commission to reflect on solutions based on proportionality and risk based differentiation, especially with regard to the multiple layers of audit and the number of controls, to a greater harmonisation between cohesion policy and competition policy, in particular state aid rules, as well as with regard to the possibility of a single set of rules for all ESI Funds;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy; ~~note~~supports, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments; points out that the replacement of grants by loans, equity or guarantees must be carried out with caution where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that grants should remain the basis of the financing of cohesion policy; notes, however, the gradual shift from grants to financial instruments; points out that ~~the replacement of grants by loans, equity or guarantees must~~loans, equity or guarantees can play a complementary role, but their use shall be carried out with caution and where such financial instruments demonstrate an added value, taking into account regional disparities and the diversity of practices and experiences; stresses the importance of assistance of the Commission, European Investment Bank and Member States to local and regional authorities on the innovative financial instruments through platforms such as fi-compass; or by providing the incentives for the beneficiaries;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Calls on the Commission to ensure better synergies between the ESI Funds and other Union funds and programmes, including EFSI, and to facilitate multi- fund options; ~~warns~~stresses that the combination of resources from ESI Funds with EFSI or other EIB financial instruments can make the funding structure more attractive to beneficiaries and private sector investors due to improved risk sharing; warns, however, that the EFSI should not undermine the strategic coherence and long-term perspective of cohesion policy programming and insists on the additionality of its resources;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Notes that state aid rules apply to the ESI Funds but not to EFSI or Horizon 2020, which causes problems with regard to increasing the level of synergy among the funds, programmes and instruments; urges, therefore, the Commission to come forward with common rules for state aid;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 b (new)

14b. Recalls the Stairway to Excellence (S2E) EU budget pilot project, which continues to support regions of all Member States in developing and exploiting the synergies between the ESI Funds, Horizon 2020 and other EU funding programmes;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 c (new)

14c. Notes that there are both divergences as well as similarities in aims and focus between Horizon 2020 and the ESI Funds; Notes that the introduction in the Common Provisions Regulation of thematic objective 1 on Strengthening research, technical development and innovation strongly increased the uptake of the research results in the real economy and shows the partial similarities between the aims and focus; takes the view, therefore, that further efforts must be made to maximise synergies between Horizon 2020 and ESI Funds in order to further strengthen smart specialisation and innovation;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of a~~lternative~~dditional indicators next to the GDP indicator, which remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such a~~lternative~~dditional indicators may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators based on social and employment aspects; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of alternative set of indicators to the GDP indicator, which remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; such set of alternative indicators may include ~~a demographic indicator or~~ dynamic indicators based on demographic, social and employment aspects, such as Social Progress Index; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

15. Invites the Commission to reflect on the development of alternative indicators to the GDP indicator, which remains the legitimate method for allocating ESI Funds fairly; ~~such alternative indicators may include a demographic indicator or dynamic indicators bas~~believes that the Social Progress Index or a demographic indicator should be considered oin ~~social and employment aspects~~this context; stresses, furthermore, the relevance of outcome indicators to strengthen the result and performance orientation of the policy;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Krzysztof HETMAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Call on the Commission to maintain the European Territorial Cooperation as one of the three equally important goals of cohesion policy; underlines, that its budget should match the great challenges that ETC has to meet, and its potential of providing the high level of European added value; calls for greater respect for Article 174 TFEU on territorial cohesion;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Encourages the Commission to consider the possibility of using NUTS III level as classification of regions in cohesion policy for some selected priorities;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Suggests an increased use of ESI Funds in order to tackle demographic change and address its regional and local consequences; notes the increasing importance of the Territorial Agenda and of successful rural-urban partnerships, as well as the exemplary role of smart cities as microcosms and catalysts for innovative solutions for regional and local challenges;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Suggests an increased use of ESI Funds in order to tackle demographic change and address its regional and local consequences, such as depopulation; notes the increasing importance of the Territorial Agenda and of successful rural-urban partnerships, as well as the exemplary role of smart cities as microcosms and catalysts for innovative solutions for regional and local challenges;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Insists on the need to continue to promote cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation as part of the aim of strengthening Territorial Cohesion described in article 174 TFEU, making European added value particularly visible; calls, therefore, for tripling the level of appropriations for European Territorial Cooperation within the total envelope for Cohesion policy;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Notes the increasing importance of the Territorial Agenda and of successful rural-urban partnerships, as well as the exemplary role of smart cities as microcosms and catalysts for innovative solutions for regional and local challenges;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Krzysztof HETMAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17a. Emphasises the role of the new territorial development tools, such as Community Led Local Development and the Integrated Territorial Investments;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Welcomes the Pact of Amsterdam and the better recognition accorded to the role of cities and urban areas in European policy-making and demands an effective implementation of the ~~partnerships and~~ cooperative working method~~s that the Pact entails~~ through the partnerships that the Pact entails; expects the results to be incorporated in future EU policies post- 2020;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Krzysztof HETMAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Underlines the enhanced urban dimension of cohesion policy in the form of specific provisions for sustainable urban development and the urban innovative actions, and considers that it should be further developed in the future; encourages the Commission to strengthen the direct support to local governments under cohesion policy by enhancing financing and providing tailored instruments for territorial development;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Endorses the EU’'s commitments under the Paris climate change agreement and underlines that the ESI Funds should be used as effectively as possible for climate change mitigation and adaptation, as well as for green economies and renewable energies, highlights the potential of European Territorial Cooperation in this regard;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. HUnderlines that in the era of euroscepticism, the increased visibility of the Cohesion Policy is vital, highlights the fact that in order to improve the visibility of ESI Funds, greater focus must be placed on participation by stakeholders and recipients; urges, furthermore, the Commission, Member States, regions and cities to communicate in a more efficient way on both the achievements of cohesion policy, particularly how it delivers the measurable change to the everyday life of EU citizens, and the lessons to be learned;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Stresses that increased communication on and visibility of the results and successes achieved with the support of ESI Funds can contribute to regaining citizens' confidence and trust in the European project; calls, therefore, for substantially increasing the visibility of cohesion policy measures through appropriate communication actions whereby greater focus must be placed on participation by stakeholders and recipients; emphasises furthermore the importance of involving stakeholders, recipients and citizens in the design and implementation of cohesion policy in a meaningful way; urges that communication activities should continue until 4 years after closure of the project when results of a project are clearly visible;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Krzysztof HETMAN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for the fostering of economic, social and territorial cohesion and solidarity across the EU to be put at the top of the EU agenda, and to maintain the fight against regional disparities, poverty and social exclusion, as well as against discrimination;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for the fostering of economic, social and territorial cohesion and solidarity across the EU to be put at the top of the EU agenda, and to maintain the fight against poverty and social exclusion, as well as against discrimination; considers that, apart from the goals enshrined in the Treaties, cohesion policy should continue serving as a tool to attain EU political objectives and remain the Union main investment policy available to all regions;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Reiterates that it is high time to prepare the post-2020 EU cohesion policy in order to launch it effectively at the very start of the new programming period; Insists that the legislative process to adopt the next MFF should be concluded by the end of 2018, so that the regulatory framework for future cohesion policy can be adopted swiftly after that and can come into force without delay on 1 January 2021, preventing the repetition of a backlog in recent periods;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Reiterates that it is high time to prepare the post-2020 EU cohesion policy in order to launch it effectively at the very start of the new programming period; calls therefore for timely adoption of all rules on management and control before the start of the new programming period; underlines that delayed implementation of operational programmes may affect the efficiency of cohesion policy and raises the risk of backlogs;

2017/04/04
Committee: REGI