9 Amendments of Gábor HARANGOZÓ related to 2008/2100(INI)
Amendment 4 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Stresses that rural areas may find it difficult to adapt to this new regional orientation policy because of their specific characteristics: an ageing population, an ongoing rural exodus, lower levels of qualification of rural populations, lack of infrastructure and public services, multiple jobs of those working in rural areas, the lack of technology for setting up projects and of centres of excellence grouping companies and educational and research institutions;
Amendment 5 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Recalls in this respect that all regions throughout the Union as a whole, including rural and remote areas, should in principle benefit from the same development opportunities to avoid any further territorial exclusion of the most disadvantaged areas;
Amendment 13 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
Recital D
D. whereas economic, social and territorial cohesion can be enhanced by aligning both per-capita incomes and employment structures in rural and urban areas,
Amendment 23 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital H
Recital H
H. whereas the establishment of the EAFRD and the separation of non- agricultural funding from the scope of cohesion policy and a broader regional development perspective may result in some objectives (e.g. environmental protection, transport and education) being either duplicated or omitted altogether,
Amendment 26 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Proposes investigating the possibility of creating, post-2013, a third Structural Fund which would be a European non- agricultural rural development fund in order to foster synergies and complementarities between regional and rural development policies, thus enabling a comprehensive and integrated implementation of their objectives.
Amendment 68 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Believes that rural development policy has a huge influence on economic, social and territorial cohesion and that due consideration should be given to whthe need to create synergies and the need for bethter it is justifiable to separate rural development measures from cohesion and regional development policoordination with cohesion and rural development policy mean that serious consideration should be given to the advantages and disadvantages of merging these policies in order to improve their coherence and efficiency;
Amendment 96 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses that per-capita income levels and access to public goods and services remain the biggest challenges for territorial cohesion policy and can be most effectively improved through support for non- agricultural activities in rural communities;
Amendment 114 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Notes that the difficulties in implementing rural development policy are the result of the separation of sectoral policies from territorial cohesion policy and the separation of the economic and social aspects of both policies, as well as the wide variety of responsibility allocation and policy coordination systems used in the Member States; in this connection, given the existing ambiguities in the legislation governing the eligibility of measures under EAFRD and under the Structural Funds, calls on the Commission to assist Member States in properly understanding the differences between these financial instruments and in appreciating possible synergies so that they can correctly absorb the funds allocated and help increase the added value of these policies;
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Takes the view that, prior to rural funding reform, the Commission should conduct a detailed assessment of the CAP's impact on regional development in the context of territorial cohesion andcohesion policy and that a set of best practices should be drawn up for rural policy as a whole;