10 Amendments of Iosif MATULA related to 2010/2158(INI)
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
Paragraph 3
3. Highlights that it is to a great extent urban areas that translate European policies into on the ground implementation; stresses that urban areas generate around 80% of the GDP of the EU and significantly contribute to the economic growth of Europe; on the other hand they also bear the costs of economic productivity (urban sprawl, congestions, pollution, exclusion etc.) that put their role as ‘motors of growth’ into risk; considers therefore that there is a clear justification for common engagement towards the urban areas of the EU; takes the view that the urban agenda must seek to develop sustainable, smart and inclusive investments so as to strengthen the role of cities as part of the EU 2020 Strategy and as a growth factor;
Amendment 47 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Calls on the Commission to make it obligatory for Member States to formally involve political leaders of key urban areas and associations of local and regional authorities into all stages of Cohesion Policy decision-making (strategic planning, definition of and negotiation on the foreseen ‘National Strategic Development Contracts’); calls on the local authorities accordingly to draw up concrete programmes of action under their specific development strategies; welcomes the Covenant of Mayors and stresses the importance of using available funding to implement programmes of action to promote the exploitation of local renewable energy potential;
Amendment 59 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that urban areas are not islands within their regions and their development must therefore be closely linked with the surrounding functional or rural areas; considers that multi-level governance and the partnership principle are the most effective tools to prevent sectorialisation and fragmentation of development policies; urges the Commission to call on the Member States specifically to set out urban-rural dimensions in planning documents and earmark funding for measures to ensure good rural-urban links;
Amendment 70 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Stresses the fact that local elected authorities have direct political accountability in terms of strategic decision-making and investing public resources; therefore for reaching the goals of Cohesion Policy and EU 2020 Strategy there must be obligatory involvement of local elected bodies in the strategic decision making process and the broad use of the option of sub-delegated responsibilities in the implementation and evaluation of the Cohesion Policy; stresses that the priority of the local authorities is the welfare and quality of life of their citizens who, together with all stakeholders, must be involved in local development strategies;
Amendment 76 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Recommends that in the next programming period one of the following options shall be used in implementation of urban dimension on national level: independent operational programmes managed by particular urban areas or joint operational programmes covering the urban areas of particular Member State or global grants or ring-fencing of urban measures and resources within specific regional operational programmes; recognises the importance of drawing up specific operational programmes in future for certain urban areas seeking to realise their development potential;
Amendment 79 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Advocates for the integrated strategic planning principles as they can help local authorities with stepping up from thinking in terms of ‘individual projects’ to a more strategic inter-sectorial thinking to use their endogenous development potential at the same time, regrets the vague common definition resulting only in formal application in some cases; urges the Commission to call on the Member States to ensure support for the development of local administrative capacities for the purposes of integrated strategic planning;
Amendment 83 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11
Paragraph 11
11. Invites the Commission to prepare a study comparing the to-date practice of individual Member States in this area concluded by specific EU guidelines for integrated urban development planning practise clarifying relations between these plans and other planning documents as well as promoting efficient partnershipand legally regulated partnerships, including cross- border urban partnerships; calls on the Commission to make integrated urban planning legally binding if EU funds are used for co-financing projects; urges the local authorities of the Member States to initiate new public-private partnerships and innovative urban infrastructural development strategies so as to attract investment and stimulate business activity; calls for improved coordination between the local and regional administrations, so as to facilitate new partnerships between urban and rural areas on the one hand and between small, medium and large cities on the other, with a view to ensuring balanced regional development;
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Calls on the Commission to create more flexible conditions for cross- financing between ERDF and ESF funds so that these rules do not create obstacles when designing and implementing integrated urban development plans/strategies; points out that the pooling of existing European funds could substantially increase available financing;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Paragraph 12 a (new)
12a. Calls on the Commission to incorporate environmental protection considerations in integrated urban development plans/strategies, given the high pollution risk in urban areas and the need for European funding for all projects with a view to achieving the EU 2020 objectives;
Amendment 99 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Stresses the promising role of new financial engineering instruments put in place during the current programming period; calls on the Commission to evaluate the experience with these tools and adapt them where necessary to improve their competitive position on the financial market in comparison with common commercial products; calls on the Member States, in view of the positive results obtained from the use of existing financial engineering instruments, to constantly ensure that the most effective use is made of the potential benefits to be derived from these financial instruments;