16 Amendments of Mercedes BRESSO related to 2014/2245(INI)
Amendment 5 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 24 a (new)
Citation 24 a (new)
- having regard to the Commission communication of 20 January 2015 entitled 'Draft Amending Budget No 2 to the General Budget 2015' (COM(2015) 16 final),
Amendment 7 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
Recital A
A. whereas the determining role of EU cohesion policy in reducing regional disparities, promoting economic, social and territorial cohesion among the regions of Member States, and supporting job creation is incontestable; whereas cohesion policy represents the main EU-wide investment policy in the real economy and is an established tool for growth and jobs in the EU, with a budget of over EUR 350 billion until 2020; whereas, during the economic crisis, cohesion policy is proving to be an essential instrument for maintaining investment levels in the various Member States; whereas in some Member States it forms the principal source of public investment; whereas the concrete and visible nature of the results of cohesion policy has been confirmed by many different evaluation methods;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2
Paragraph 2
2. Highlights that cohesion policy has proven its capacity to react quickly with flexible measures to improve the liquidity gap for Member States and regions, such as reducing national co-financing and providing additional advance payments, as well as redirecting 13 % of total funding (EUR 45 billion) to support economic activity and employment with direct effects; considers it essential, therefore, to carry out a substantial in-depth medium- term review of objectives and funding levels in line with any developments affecting the social and economic situation of the Member States or any of their regions;
Amendment 33 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Stresses that a stable fiscal and economic – as well as regulatory, administrative and institutional – environment is crucial for the effectiveness of cohesion policy but must not undermine achievement of its aims and objectives; emphasises that, in order to achieve both the cohesion and Europe 2020 objectives, the policy must be aligned closely with sectoral policies and other EU investment schemes;
Amendment 39 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
Paragraph 5
5. Expresses its serious concern about the significant delay in the implementation of cohesion policy 2014-2020, including the delay in adoption of Operational Programmes, with only just over 100148 Operational Programmes adopted at the end of 2014, as well as a backlog in payments amounting to ca EUR 25 billion for the 2007-2013 programming period; stresses that these delays are undermining the credibility of cohesion policy, effectiveness and sustainability, challenging national, regional and local authorities’ capacity to plan effectively and implement the European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) for the 2014-2020 periodbut welcomes the recent efforts of Member States and the Commission which will mean that three quarters of all Cohesion Policy programmes will have been adopted by the end of the first quarter of 2015;
Amendment 55 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a Considers that the 2014-2020 Multiannual Financial Framework resulting from the Commission's proposed modification of the MFF Regulation carrying over to 2015 alone appropriations not allocated in 2014 significantly increases the risk of de- commitment in 2018 in respect of programmes not adopted in 2014 and hence fails to encourage the full take-up of EU of resources or effective support for EU investment in growth and jobs; calls on the Commission, in drawing up the 2017 strategic report provided for in Art. 53 of Regulation 1303/2013, to propose sufficiently well in advance appropriate legislative and other measures, so as to avoid the risk of decommitment;
Amendment 58 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)
Paragraph 8 a (new)
8a. Calls on the Commission to consider carefully - taking into account possible repercussions on growth and jobs - the application of financial corrections or suspension of payments;
Amendment 64 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Welcomes the new European Fund for Strategic Investment (EFSI) and its potential leverage effect; advises the parties concerned to build on the experiences gained from the implementation of the European Economic Recovhighlights the need to ensure the additionality of its resources and hence complementarity and synergy Plan in 2008, in particular regarding smart investments; calls for the coordination of all EU investment policies – in particular cohesion policy – to ensure complementarity and avoid overlaps; suggests that the implementation of this new EU investment plan build on the experiences of the three joint initiatives JEREMIE, JESSICA and JASMINE, which allowed an increase in the delivery of Structural Funds from EUR 1.2 billion in 2000-2006 to EUR 8.4 billion in 2007- 2012between this fund and European Structural and Investment Funds; advises the parties concerned to build on the experience gained in the implementation of the 2008 European economic recovery plan, particularly as regards smart investments;
Amendment 72 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
Paragraph 10 a (new)
10a. Calls for the coordination and concertation of all EU investment policies, in particular cohesion policy, to guarantee complementarity and avoid overlaps; recommends that the implementation of this new EU investment plan build on experience acquired with three joint initiatives JEREMIE, JESSICA and JASMINE, which allowed an increase in the delivery of Structural Funds from EUR 1.2 billion in 2000-2006 to EUR 8.4 billion in 2007- 2012; calls for broad and detailed analysis, in consultation with the European Parliament, of the role and capital build-up of the European Investment Bank (EIB) and the European Investment Fund (EIF);
Amendment 90 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
Paragraph 15
15. Notes the importance of a solid macroeconomic environment for cohesion investments and welcomes the link of the ESIF to the European Semesterat good, efficient governance institutions are necessary for vigorous economic and social development and is mindful of the possible implications of a solid macroeconomic environment for cohesion investments; expresses concern at the fact that ESI Funds might be jeopardised on account of macroeconomic conditionality, undermining the aims of cohesion policy, the main EU investment policy, in particular for promoting European growth and economic and social development projects;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16
Paragraph 16
16. Emphasises, in this contextas regards the linking of the Structural and Investment Funds to the European Semester, Parliament’s responsibility to control; demands that the Commission and the Council provide full, transparent and timely information on the criteria for, and on the entire procedure that could trigger, reprogramming or a suspension of commitments or payments of the ESIF in accordance with in Article 23(15) of the Common Provisions Regulation;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)
Paragraph 16 a (new)
16a. Considers that macroeconomic conditionality should serve the sole purpose of making cohesion policy more sustainable and efficient and rejects the idea that regions, localities, and/or citizens should be penalised for macroeconomic reasons that have arisen at national or European level; points to the importance of close institutional coordination of all tiers of government and draws attention to the possibly considerable administrative workload entailed in reprogramming of funds and to the unduly severe disadvantage resulting from a suspension of commitments or payments, and therefore calls on the Commission and Council to proceed with caution whenever they propose to apply Article 23 of the Common Provisions Regulation;
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18
Paragraph 18
18. Stresses that the ESIF could make a significant contribution to reversing the negative social consequences of the crisis, and that, for this to happen, an integrated approach offered by multi-fund programming should be pursufacilitated and simplified, with more efficient coordination of, and greater flexibility among, the funds, allowing for better exploitation of the synergies between the ESF and the ERDF, in particular; emphasises that investments funded by the ESF cannot produce optimal results if the relevant infrastructure and appropriate institutions are not in place; stresses that the integrated and territorial approach is particularly essential when it comes to environmental and energy matters; draws attention to the fact that the ESIF can effectively support social inclusion, and attention to the fact that the ESIF can effectively support social inclusion, and should therefore be mobilised to help the integration of disadvantaged and vulnerable groups such as Roma and persons with disabilities;
Amendment 146 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
Paragraph 24
24. Notes with concern the relative lack of a territorial approach, and in particular of references to cross-border co-operation, in the Sixth Cohesion Report; points out that the inclusion of cross-border and macro-regional aspects would have had an enriching effect, as far as e.g. infrastructure, labour market and mobility, environment, water use and disposal, waste management, health care, research and development, tourism, public services and governance are concerned, as all of these areas include remarkable cross-border elements and potential; is convinced that in the programming period 2014-2020 the performance of European border and cross-border regions in coming to terms with the crisis, by growing smarter, more inclusive and more sustainable, will improve considerably;
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)
Paragraph 24 a (new)
24a. Hopes that the new set of programmes will accord a central role in the achievement of cohesion policy objectives to rural areas, islands, mountain areas, remote and outlying areas and, in general, all areas with permanent natural or demographic disadvantages;
Amendment 163 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Recalls, in view of all of the above, the necessity for a new dynamic to be given to the EU cohesion policy debate; states that the 2018-2019 European Parliament election years will be decisive, as the then newly- elected Parliament, and new Commission, will have to deal with the termination of the Europe 2020 strategy and an upcoming new MFF, as well as prepare new legislation for cohesion policy; notes that the cohesion policy debate has to take into account the serious time constraints and delays experienced at the beginning of the current programming period;