Activities of Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2 a. Recalls that the 2011 Directive on the application of patients’ rights in cross- border healthcare entered into application in October 2013; urges the Commission, in this regard, to monitor the proper implementation of this directive and to ensure that patients are comprehensively informed of their new cross-border healthcare rights;

2013/12/06
Committee: CULT

2013/2186(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Feels that the limitations and shortcomings of Directive 96/71/EC on the posting of workers are leading to numerous abuses that harm employees covered by this Directive, and that the lack of clear information, checks and cooperation between administrations is preventing posted workers from fully asserting their rights; calls on the Council to unblock the ongoing reform of this Directive in order to improve protection for posted workers and to combat abuses and social dumping;

2013/12/06
Committee: CULT

2013/2182(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the modernisation of education systems in Europe requires investment in education facilities that are well equipped in terms of information and communication technologies;

2014/02/07
Committee: CULT

2013/2182(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas open educational resources (OER) can play a crucial role in facilitating lifelong learning for all learners and whereas, at the same time, a digitally inadequate education system can hamper the development of learners’ knowledge and skills;

2014/02/07
Committee: CULT

2013/2182(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas the European Union has still not fully grasped the potential of ITC in terms of cultural and educational wealth and diversity, access to information and exchange of good practices;

2014/02/07
Committee: CULT

2013/2182(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the Commission Communication which sets out a Union agenda in the field of OER, and which focuses on the potential of these resources to widen access to and equity in education and make it more diversified; believes that the emergence of a European framework for the development of OER may allow for improvement in the Member States’ education systems;

2014/02/07
Committee: CULT

2013/2182(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Emphasises that OER create opportunities for education and training institutions, teachers, students and pupils to teach and learn in innovative ways; calls on educational institutions to create an organisational environment in which such innovation is welcomed; calls, in this connection, on Member States and regions, as part of smart specialisation strategies, to establish innovation and start-up centres of excellence which make full use of the potential of ICT;

2014/02/07
Committee: CULT

2013/2182(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Points out that ICT and OER are currently mainly used in higher education; encourages their use from a very early age in primary and secondary education;

2014/02/07
Committee: CULT

2013/2182(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Calls on the Member States and the local and regional authorities to use the available funding through the European Structural and Investment Funds for ~~improv~~overcoming the ~~digital infrastructur~~territorial digital divide by improving infrastructure and networks and promoting training in ICT and their effective use, taking into account the needs of educational institutions, in particular in rural and remote regions;

2014/02/07
Committee: CULT

2013/2181(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital N a (new)

Na. whereas gastronomy is closely bound up with farming practices in European territories and with their local products;

2014/01/21
Committee: CULT

2013/2181(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Points to the need to also enhance the school curriculum with information about gastronomic culture, food preparation, production, conservation and distribution processes, the social and cultural influence of foodstuffs and consumer rights; urges the Member States to incorporate into their school curricula workshops on the development of the senses, in particular taste, which combine instruction on the nutritional benefits of foodstuffs with the provision of information on regional and national gastronomic heritage;

2014/01/21
Committee: CULT

2013/2181(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Highlights the usefulness of information and communication technologies (ICT) as an educational tool to assist learning; encourages the creation of interactive platforms to facilitate access to, and dissemination of, the European, national and regional gastronomic heritage, in order to promote the preservation and transmission of traditional knowledge among professionals, artisans and citizens;

2014/01/21
Committee: CULT

2013/2181(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls on Member States to ensure that teachers are properly trained, in collaboration with nutritionists and doctors, to correctly teach food sciences in schools and universities;

2014/01/21
Committee: CULT

2013/2181(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Emphasises the need to create awareness of the diversity and quality of Europe’s gastronomy, which forms part of our cultural heritage, including by enhancing the value at EU and international level of European agricultural products that are or may be covered by protected designations of origin (PDOs); calls on the Member States and regions to develop common PDO labels for products of the same kind emanating from cross-border geographical areas;

2014/01/21
Committee: CULT

2013/2181(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Supports such initiatives as may be developed by Member States and their regions to promote and preserve their local gastronomic heritage; urges the regions to promote local and dietetic gastronomy in schools and collective catering in association with local producers in order to preserve and enhance the regional gastronomic heritage, stimulate local agriculture and shorten supply chains;

2014/01/21
Committee: CULT

2013/2176(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Notes that, according to Eurostat, the economic crisis has made it harder for SMEs to obtain bank loans and that, between 2007 and 2010, in 19 of the 20 Member States for which figures are available there was an increase in the proportion of loan applications that met with a refusal;

2013/10/21
Committee: REGI

2013/2176(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Asks the Council to adopt the most ambitious measures proposed by the Commission and the European Investment Bank in the context of the joint risk-sharing mechanism to be developed under the new MFF by blending EU budget resources (from COSME and Horizon 2020) and structural fund monies with the lending capacity of the EIB, the EIF and publicly owned national development banks;

2013/10/21
Committee: REGI

2013/2176(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Asks Member States and regions to put effective information and support systems in place so as to enable SMEs to benefit from EU funding; points out that, although Member States spent a total of EUR 23 billion between 2007 and 2011 on operational programmes to support SMEs, the linkage between EU policies and SMEs is still complicated, mainly because of the multi-tiered management of the EU funds, the burden of red tape, tight deadlines for submitting tenders, the over-complexity of financial engineering tools and the fact that SMEs do not have sufficient reserves to meet the pre- financing requirement for certain projects;

2013/10/21
Committee: REGI

2013/2167(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Calls for the continuation and amplification of cross-border cultural cooperation programmes under the European Neighbourhood Instruments, such as the Euromed Heritage IV programme, so as to preserve and promote Europe's cultural heritage and intercultural exchanges;

2013/12/06
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas the history of Europe is inextricably linked with tragedy and the experience of various forms of totalitarianism, such as Communism, National Socialism, Fascism and other criminal systems which brought death and unimaginable suffering to millions of Europeans;deleted

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas a great many EU Member States have, at some point in their history, lived through the painful experience of a totalitarian regime;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas the European Union undertook in 2007 to foster a European historical memory with the intention of forging a common identity;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the European Union was constructed against the backdrop of the trauma brought about by two all-powerful totalitarianism systems~~: National Socialism and Communism, which, although they differed in ideology and form,~~, which were both characterised by brutality and claimed the lives of millions; whereas it is inappropriate to argue that one was better or worse than the other; ~~and whereas united Europe is founded on the basis of Judaeo-Christian ethics, Greek aesthetics and Roman law;~~

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas the European Union was born from the impetus provided by several European leaders, and could not have become the area of peace and freedom that we know today without their energy and motivation;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas the creation of European symbols such as the European flag, passport and anthem as early as the 1980s sought to give concrete expression to the common collective identity towards which we strive;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)

Bc. whereas, while not repudiating the past, one should not confuse history, which draws on experiences, with historical memory, which calls for objectivity;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas for many European countries the end of the Second World War did not lead to full freedom; whereas for many years after the war Europe was divided, and its central and eastern parts not fully liberated until after 1989, when the opportunity presented itself for genuine integration across the entire continent;deleted

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas even after the Second World War the building of a united Europe met with very mixed success, and a democratic harmonisation of the governments of its Member States would only come about after 1989;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the trauma of 1939-45 must not be allowed to be repeated, and in that regard remembering and accurately portraying the past is of vital importance; whereas, also, the acceptance of historical lies or the denial of difficult episodes in history can lead to xenophobia and hatred; whereas the claim made for many years that the Katyń massacre was a German crime is a classic example of a historical liethe Member States must learn the lessons it taught and work together to overcome difficult episodes in their pasts in order to forge among the European public a genuine collective memory that transcends the horrors of the past;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas education plays a key role in understanding history ~~and promoting historical truth, especially among young people, whose knowledge of history often comes solely from electronic media~~, especially among younger generations of Europeans;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas culture is a universal and easily accessible carrier ofor harnessing the historical memory ~~and content influencing Europeans’ awareness~~of the European Union and facilitating ~~an understand~~the overcoming of dark episodes in the past; whereas, also, history is a huge source of inspiration for artists and culture-makers;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

~~G. whereas the temptation can exist to use culture, particularly film and literature, for propaganda purposes, falsifying history and presenting inaccurate interpretations of historical events;~~deleted

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

~~H. whereas non-governmental organisations and the voluntary sector play a major role in documenting and uncovering the truth of totalitarian crimes;~~deleted

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the presentation and teaching of history should be based not on political interpretation but on solid research work; whereas the full opening up of historical archives will make it possible to carry out diligent research and to verify ‘historical lies’;deleted

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

Ia. whereas it is clear that some Member States which until very recently were suffering under dictatorships should be able to access their archives to help come to terms with their past;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas the creation of ~~a Platform of~~the House of European History, which will embody European Mmemory and Cconscience, is an essential step on the road to genuine reconciliation among European nations, and whereas EU financial support is essential for ~~this projec~~it to achieve its mission;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

~~1. Strongly condemns all crimes against humanity and the totalitarian regimes which left a bloody stain on our history;~~deleted

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses that the duty of memory must not be a tool used for political ends and that it must serve as a means of transcending tragic events in European history and ensuring a ‘renaissance’ of unified European culture;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Notes that as early as 1973, in the Declaration on European Identity, European governments were voicing the need to rediscover common European values;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Pays tribute to all the heroes, known and unknown, who, acting out of a profound ~~sense of humanism~~commitment and faithfulness to ~~their values, opposed the totalitarian regimes and demonstrated their humanity, often paying with their own lives~~democratic values, showed resistance and worked towards the unification of Europe;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Welcomes the discussions held between the countries of the Union on Europe’s past and how to commemorate it, and views these as necessary awareness-raising steps in terms of the existence of a European community;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Acknowledges the sovereign role and position of the Member States in designing their own teaching programmes; calls, at the same time, for selective memory to be avoided when these programmes are drawn up and condemns an instrumental approach to history and its political interpretation;deleted

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

~~4. Points out that it is unacceptable to apply double standards when assessing and critically analysing Communism and National Socialism;~~deleted

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Notes that all countries implement their own history policy, which helps to build a sense of national identity, but which, in combination with ignorance and selective memory, can sometimes lead to falsifications of history that are dangerous and hurtful to victims and their families, as is the case when referring to Auschwitz-Birkenau, the Nazi German concentration camp in occupied Poland, as a ‘Polish death camp’;deleted

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Emphasises that the countries of Europe see life in the same way, that this is based on the desire to build a society designed to serve man, and that they mean to protect democratic principles;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Stresses that talk of a European historical memory presupposes an acceptance to view history in an alternative and objective manner, or in other words one that enables one to develop one’s viewpoint;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 c (new)

5c. Points out that forgetting the past does not mean denying the past, and that this is a necessary foundation from which historical memory can emerge;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Considers that historical ~~truth and~~ memory, nurtured among other things by educational activities and cultural events, will reinforce genuine reconciliation between nations and authentic European integration ~~based on truth~~;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Stresses that Europe has a specific, finely-developed vision of democracy, and it is this unique approach, amalgamated with its past errors, which will serve as the foundation of the identity of Europe;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 b (new)

6b. Stresses the fact that European states must reflect on one important aspect of European historical memory: they need both justice and to confront their pasts, and far from being opposites, reconciliation and the development of a shared memory in fact make justice possible;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Supports the proposal for ~~a Platform of European Memory and Conscience, the aim of which is to establish an international judicial body to deal with the most serious crimes of the Communist dictators~~the creation of House of European History, which will serve as the memory and conscience of Europe;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on Member States to support ambitious European history teaching programmes ~~which do not gloss over the most difficult episodes; recognises that Member States have complete autonomy as regards the content of their teaching syllabuses~~;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Notes that modern media can play a vital role in promoting historical truth, both by accurately portraying historical events and by granting appropriate funding to historical productions and educational history programmes;deleted

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Stresses the importance of ~~EU funds in promoting historical memory; notes that such funds should be used for projects linked to history education, promotion, research, archiving and digitisation~~maintaining and digitising the archive records of Member States in order to allow their citizens, and those of other Member States, access to the European historical memory;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Deplores the planned reduction in funds for the ‘Europe for Citizens’ programme, and calls on the Commission to guarantee better funding for ~~national and transnational~~ educational and cultural projects which raise awareness of ~~the darker episodes in~~ Europe’s history;

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Stresses that the European Union should support cooperation between institutes and organisations which foster historical memory, and in this context calls on the Commission to ensure financial support for professional historical research to form the basis for future educational and cultural projects; calls for historical archives to be fully opened up to research historians;deleted

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2129(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Supports citizens’ initiatives and non- governmental organisations, including those outside the EU, which are actively engaged in researching the history of nations and gathering documents on the crimes committed under totalitarianism, and supports transnational partnerships and networks with the aim of promoting mutual relations between EU citizens; supports, in that context, cooperation between Member States and countries covered by the European Neighbourhood Policy;deleted

2013/10/29
Committee: CULT

2013/2095(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Calls on those Member States which have made their regions responsible for the management of EU funding to ensure that new staff in charge of that task have the requisite skills, and that the allocation of the funding is not politicised in any way;

2013/10/22
Committee: REGI

2013/2094(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Calls on public and private stakeholders to work towards the establishment of regional innovation incubators, bringing together creative companies, universities, investors and cultural institutions to promote the cultural and creative industries as part of the regions’ smart specialisation strategies;

2013/10/22
Committee: REGI

2013/2094(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Points out that in border areas, the challenges are often the same on both sides of the border, owing to the common territorial features which these areas share; calls on the Commission, Member States and local and regional authorities, with the help of EU interregional cooperation funding, to draw up cross- border smart specialisation strategies and establish cross-border clusters;

2013/10/22
Committee: REGI

2013/2073(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1 a. Believes that the EU first priority should be the fight against youth unemployment in Europe; is worried about the alarming level of young people without neither education nor job; believes that if the EU can not address properly this challenge, the lack of perspective for youth will blur the confidence in the European project;

2013/05/24
Committee: REGI

2013/2073(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5 a. Regrets that great announcements made by the European Council relating to engagements for youth are not reflected in equivalent financial commitments; notes that a large part of the "Growth Package" announced in 2012 were mainly a partial reallocation of structural funds already promised and committed; notes that on the 6 billions agreed by the European Council for the "Youth Employment Initiative" for 2014 - 2020, 3 billions are taken from the ESF allocation and do not constitute new credits; regrets also that the European Council would like to reduce funding for "Erasmus for all" in comparison with the Commission proposal; asks the Council to respect European Parliament power of co legislator during the current negotiations;

2013/05/24
Committee: REGI

2013/2073(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5 b. Regrets ambivalence from the Council advocating additional resources for young people but delaying negotiations on payments on amending budget for 2013, threatening the Erasmus scholarship payments; calls on the Council to adopt a more constructive approach by ceasing to dig the gap between payment appropriations and commitment appropriations in each annual budget;

2013/05/24
Committee: REGI

2013/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses the importance of the Structured Dialogue; calls on the Commission to reach out to the greatest possible number of young people at both local and regional level; urges the Commission to build a strong partnership with local authorities;

2013/05/30
Committee: CULT

2013/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Stresses that the Member States should invest more in linking educational curricula to labour market demands, notably in technological sectors which are especially suitable for young people; stresses the importance of enhancing youth mobility;

2013/05/30
Committee: CULT

2013/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. UStresses the importance of strengthening vocational training and urges the Member States to incorporate vocational training and orientation workshops in education;

2013/05/30
Committee: CULT

2013/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to launch further initiatives to develop a pan- European non-formal education and mobility system that recognises volunteering services, internships and social work; considers that it is necessary to focus on the Leonardo da Vinci programme in order to encourage apprentices to do work-related training abroad;

2013/05/30
Committee: CULT

2013/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Urges the Member States to take full advantage of the EU Structural Funds 2007-2013, especially the FSE; calls on the Commission to keep the European Parliament regularly informed about the progress made by the Member States;

2013/05/30
Committee: CULT

2013/2073(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Stresses the need for Member States to implement strategies supporting young people's access to ICT;

2013/05/30
Committee: CULT

2013/2064(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas in order to safeguard the achievements of EYV 2011, European volunteering policy, to which a piecemeal approach is currently being taken at EU level, with responsibility being scattered among a range of departments, needs to be properly structured and coordinated;

2013/09/05
Committee: CULT

2013/2064(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Calls for a European statute for voluntary organisations and volunteers to be adopted in order to help ensure that they are given proper legal and institutional recognition;

2013/09/05
Committee: CULT

2013/2064(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Emphasises that volunteering offers young people who have broken off their schooling an inclusive environment and inclusive activities;

2013/09/05
Committee: CULT

2013/2064(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to introduce a European volunteering policy worthy of the name and to use the open method of cooperation to foster dialogue and cooperation between stakeholders in the various Member States;

2013/09/05
Committee: CULT

2013/2064(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Urges national, regional and local authorities to streamline ~~bureauc~~administraticve procedures and provide tax incentives for NGOs and voluntary organisations, in particular small organisations with limited resources;

2013/09/05
Committee: CULT

2013/2064(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Emphasises the need to make it easier for NGOs to gain access to European funding, in particular under the ESF, at national and European level;

2013/09/05
Committee: CULT

2013/2045(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph C a (new)

Ca. whereas European Union policies should be taken up at local and national level and carried into effect on the ground;

2013/05/30
Committee: CULT

2013/2045(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses the need to ensure education and training for all, draws attention to the important role played by the regions in training, employment and mobility policy, and calls on the regions to use all the means at their disposal to facilitate young people’s access to employment and help them to diversify their skill base;

2013/05/30
Committee: CULT

2013/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas one of the EU’s main priorities is to promote mobility, and whereas a target of ensuring that 20% of EU graduates have spent part of their time at university abroad has been set for 2020; whereas student, teacher and worker mobility plays a key role in European integration;

2013/07/03
Committee: CULT

2013/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas accessible, flexible and high quality education and training have a crucial impact on the personal development and fulfilment of young people, also promoting their active citizenship and wellbeing and enhancing their ability to contribute to society and the world of work;

2013/07/03
Committee: CULT

2013/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas it is necessary to examine closely future trends in labour market needs in order to adapt and modernise curricula and offer the right skills for the right jobs and for new economic models that emerge;

2013/07/03
Committee: CULT

2013/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas, as education models change, the teaching profession needs to change accordingly (skills and qualifications, status and careers);

2013/07/03
Committee: CULT

2013/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Calls for a holistic approach to education and training that addresses both academic and vocational aspects, and highlights the important role of non-formal and informal learning as part of an overall lifelong learning strategy aiming at a socially inclusive knowledge society with strong individuals and active citizens;

2013/07/03
Committee: CULT

2013/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Stresses the importance of regional policies that foster the establishment of regional innovation incubators bringing creative firms, universities, investors and cultural bodies together in promoting education and training;

2013/07/03
Committee: CULT

2013/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls for more cooperation between educational institutions, the business sector, social partners, and local and regional authorities in order to exchange best practices and to promote partnerships as a means of transition from education to work;

2013/07/03
Committee: CULT

2013/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Calls for greater use to be made of the various EU programmes and funds available, in particular regional funding;

2013/07/03
Committee: CULT

2013/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Notes the demographic changes within the Union, an ageing population and low birth rates, and consequently the need to acquire new skills and competences throughout life in order to be able to deal with the challenges thrown up by the world economy and respond to new labour market requirements;

2013/07/03
Committee: CULT

2013/2041(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Recalls the importance of high-quality teacher and trainer education that needs to be complemented with career-long professional training, due in particular to the rapid changes in ICT and digital media, because the knowledge, skills and attitudes of each of Europe’s teachers and trainers have a direct effect on the level achieved by learners at the end of their studies and on what they take from the learning process;

2013/07/03
Committee: CULT

2013/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas all languages, including those which are endangered, reflect historical, social, cultural and ecological knowledge and skills that form part of the richness of the European Union and the basis of the European identity;

2013/04/26
Committee: CULT

2013/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas there are therefore many traditional European languages throughout the EU that should be regarded as being endangered~~: in the High North, in Atlantic areas in northern and southern Europe, in the Alps, in the Pyrenees, in the Mediterranean, in northern Europe, in central Europe and in European territories overseas~~;

2013/04/26
Committee: CULT

2013/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas linguistic diversity makes a positive contribution to social cohesion by boosting mutual understanding and self- esteem, and whereas linguistic diversity fosters access to culture and contributes to creativity and to the acquisition of intercultural skills, especially in border areas;

2013/04/26
Committee: CULT

2013/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the notion of linguistic diversity in the European Union embraces not only official languages, but also co-official languages, regional languages, and languages that are not officially recognised within the Member States;

2013/04/26
Committee: CULT

2013/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas children who are bmultilingual from the start have a natural skills that they can use to learn more languages later on, and whereas linguistic pluralism is an advantage for young Europeans;

2013/04/26
Committee: CULT

2013/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Calls on the Commission and the Council to adapt EU policies and programmes so as to support endangered languages and linguistic diversity using EU financial support tools for the period between 2014 and 2020, including: programmes on education and training, youth and sport, the culture and media programme, the structural funds (cohesion fund, ERDF, ESF, European territorial cooperation, EARDF) and all instruments and exchange platforms designed to promote new technologies and multimedia platforms;

2013/04/26
Committee: CULT

2013/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Takes the view that the European Union should support and encourage Member States which are following a language policy that enables children to acquire two ~~mother to~~European languages from the very earliest age; points out that such a programme would, as all linguists maintain, help children learn additional languages later on, and that it would offer speakers of traditional languages practical support in revitalising intergenerational language transmission in areas in which it is dwindling;

2013/04/26
Committee: CULT

2013/2007(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Notes the Commission’s multilingualism programmes; takes the view that promoters of projects connected with minority languages must be able to take advantage of the opportunities they offer, and, given that language communities fighting for the survival of endangered languages often consist of small groups of people, urges the Commission ~~not to deem~~to facilitate access to, and publicise, programmes involving these communities in, and to provide guidance on their eligibleility for funding ~~on the grounds of~~, taking into account the low levels of financial commitment;

2013/04/26
Committee: CULT

2013/2006(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Expresses strong concern about the consequences of the financial and economic downturn, falling investment, and the growing inequalities in the EU, especially among its regions as regards productivity, competitiveness and prosperity; points out that without strong policy measures and the allocation of adequate financial resources in support of a new industrial ‘revolution’ in the EU, the sharp decline will have a serious negative impact not only on the EU’s output, but also on social and territorial cohesion;

2013/06/21
Committee: REGI

2013/2006(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Points out that in border areas, the industrial challenges are often the same on both sides of the border, owing to the common territorial features which these areas share; calls on the Commission, the Member States, and local and regional authorities to draw up cross-border industrial conversion strategies, aimed at creating cross-border clusters, and joint training and employment strategies on a scale appropriate to cross-border population centres;

2013/06/21
Committee: REGI

2013/2006(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses the need to set out clear industrial competitiveness policy strategies in the National Reform Programmes, through a more focused approach which includes the setting of priorities in relation to: facilitating access to finance; support for R&D ~~and education~~, education, and vocational training; administrative simplification; lower costs for businesses; the reduction of labour taxation; greater flexibility on the labour market; Europe-wide corporate tax harmonisation; improvement of infrastructure; greater involvement and coordination of all stakeholders at regional and local level and strong support for SMEs and entrepreneurs; believes that a more coordinated approach between different levels of government and stakeholders will be achieved by including the proposed territorial pacts in the partnership agreements;

2013/06/21
Committee: REGI

2013/2006(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Maintains that individual EU policies and the various sources of European reindustrialisation funding need to be coordinated more closely, following the guidelines to be set out in the future 2014-2020 Common Strategic Framework;

2013/06/21
Committee: REGI

2013/2006(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 b (new)

5b. Takes the view that the potential of cultural and creative industries – in spite of their contribution to the European economy – is still not being sufficiently factored into reindustrialisation strategies; calls on public and private stakeholders to set up regional innovation incubators enabling creative companies, universities, investors, and cultural institutions to band together to promote cultural and creative industries;

2013/06/21
Committee: REGI

2013/2006(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Agrees with the Commission and the Council that competitiveness gains in the internal market, but also in trade with third countries, should be an absolute priority; calls on the Commission to expand aid schemes to help industries, and SMEs in particular, to export and internationalise; underlines the need for, and the importance of, the drawing-up of European standards that are widely applied and defended by the EU on the global market, so that innovative measures implemented by European enterprises do not penalise them, but instead gradually become a global standard; calls on the Commission to champion genuine reciprocity in trade, especially where access to public procurement is concerned, in order to cancel out the protectionist measures and discriminatory practices employed by some trading partners;

2013/06/21
Committee: REGI

2013/2006(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Calls on the Commission to establish ecological and social taxation at EU borders with a view to balancing out the European social and environmental standards which EU industries have to observe;

2013/06/21
Committee: REGI

2013/2006(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Is of the opinion that, together with grants, there is a need for loans, venture capital, guarantees and other forms of financial engineering to play a stronger role; calls for the proper use of financial instruments through combining the various forms of financial support, both direct and indirect, especially those available to SMEs, in order to offer more tailor-made access to finances; calls for a European SME bank to be set up along the lines of the French OSEO and the German Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau;

2013/06/21
Committee: REGI

2013/2006(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Commission to review, and provide for greater flexibility in, the rules on competition laid down in Articles 101 and 102 TFEU so as to encourage the emergence of European industrial ‘champions’ in the mould of Airbus or EADS; also draws attention to the calls made in Parliament’s Vlasak report (2013/2104(INI)) for the Regional Aid Guidelines (RAG) to be revised in order to facilitate productive investment in European industries.

2013/06/21
Committee: REGI

2013/0309(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 23 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d

d) ) minimise the effects of observed temporary or exceptional network congestion provided that equivalent types of traffic are treated equally.

2013/12/06
Committee: CULT

2013/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

(9) In order to better take into account the specific nature of those disasters which, although important, do not reach the minimum scale required to benefit from a contribution from the Fund, the criteria for regional disasters should be determined based on the damage calculable by reference to regional gross domestic product (GDP). Specific criteria may be determined for regional disasters in the remotest regions, to take account of their vulnerability. Those criteria should be determined in a clear and simple manner in order to reduce the possibility of applications being submitted which do not meet the requirements set out in Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002.

2014/01/08
Committee: REGI

2013/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) It should also be specified that eligible operations ~~should not~~may include expenditure for technical assistance.

2014/01/08
Committee: REGI

2013/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 1

Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002
Article 2 – paragraph 3

For the purposes of this Regulation, a ‘regional natural disaster’ shall mean any natural disaster resulting, in a region of a Member State or a country involved in accession negotiations with the Union at NUTS 2 level, in direct damage in excess of 1,5 % of the region's gross domestic product (GDP). Additional criteria shall be established by the Commission to take account of the vulnerability of the remotest regions. Where the disaster concerns several regions at NUTS 2 level, the threshold shall be applied to the weighted average GDP of those regions. Where the disaster concerns cross-border regions at NUTS 3 level of several Member States, the threshold shall be applied to the GDP of the sum of the NUTS 3 territories equivalent to a cross- border region at NUTS 2 level.

2014/01/08
Committee: REGI

2013/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b

TExternal technical assistance, including management, monitoring, information and communication, complaint resolution, and control and audit, ~~is not~~may be eligible for a contribution from the Fund provided it does not exceed 2 % of the total amount of the contribution.

2014/01/08
Committee: REGI

2013/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a

Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

As soon as possible and no later than ~~ten~~15 weeks after the first occurrence of damage as a consequence of a natural disaster, a State may submit an application for a contribution from the Fund to the Commission providing all available information on, at least:

2014/01/08
Committee: REGI

2013/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002
Article 4 – paragraph 1a

In the event of a progressively unfolding natural disaster, the ~~ten~~15-week application deadline referred to in paragraph 1 shall run from the date at which the public authorities of the eligible State take official action for the first time against the effects of the disaster.

2014/01/08
Committee: REGI

2013/0248(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 4

Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002
Article 4a – point 2

The amount of the advance shall not exceed 10 5% of the amount of the contribution anticipated and shall in no case exceed EUR 340 000 000. Once the definitive amount of the contribution has been determined, the Commission shall take into account the sum of the advance prior to the balance of the contribution being paid. The Commission shall recover unduly paid advances.

2014/01/08
Committee: REGI

2013/0248(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1 – point 8

Regulation (EC) No 2012/2002
Article 8 – paragraph 1

The contribution from the Fund shall be used within one and a half years from the date on which the Commission has disbursed the full amount of the assistance. Any part of the contribution remaining unused by that deadline or found to be used for ineligible operations shall be recovered by the Commission from the beneficiary State.

2014/01/08
Committee: REGI

2013/0029(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 4

Directive 2012/34/EU
Article 7 b – paragraph 4

4. For a period of ~~thre~~one years after leaving the infrastructure manager, members of the Supervisory Board or management board and senior staff members of the infrastructure manager shall not be entitled to hold any senior position with any other legal entities within the vertically integrated undertaking. For a period of ~~thre~~one years after leaving those other legal entities within the vertically integrated undertaking, their supervisory or management boards' members and senior staff members shall not be entitled to hold any senior position with the infrastructure manager.

2013/09/23
Committee: TRAN

2013/0029(COD)

Dominique VLASTO, Michel DANTIN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a directive
Article 1 – point 8 d (new)

Directive 2012/34/EU
Article 57 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

8d. In Article 57 paragraph 1, the following subparagraph is added: In the light of experience acquired through cooperation with the regulatory bodies, the Commission shall, one year after entry into force of the directive, submit a legislative proposal establishing a European regulatory body with a supervisory and arbitration function empowering it to deal with cross-border issues and hear appeals against decisions taken by national regulatory bodies.'

2013/09/23
Committee: TRAN

2013/0028(COD)

Dominique VLASTO, Michel DANTIN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 1 – point a

Regulation (EC) No. 1370/2007
Article 2 – point c

~~"(c)~~ "competent local authority" means any competent authority whose geographical area of competence is not national ~~and which covers the transport needs of an urban agglomeration or a rural district;"~~;

2013/09/23
Committee: TRAN

2013/0028(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 1 – point b

Regulation (EC) No. 1370/2007
Article 2 – point e

"The scope of public service obligations shall exclude all public transport services that go beyond of what is necessary to reap local, regional or sub-national network effects. Commercially viable lines may be included in public service contracts where such inclusion generates a network effect, making it possible to preserve the economic balance of public service contracts.

2013/09/23
Committee: TRAN

2013/0028(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique VLASTO, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 2

Regulation (EC) No. 1370/2007
Article 2 a (new) – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

The assessment of appropriateness referred to in point (b) shall take into account whether a public intervention in the provision of passenger transport is a suitable means of achieving the objectives of the public transport plans and the network effect necessary for economic equilibrium in the public service obligation.

2013/09/23
Committee: TRAN

2013/0000(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Points out to the restrictive impact of new rules on investment and growth of regions as they move from the less developed to the more developed category; is aware that certain regions eligible for State aid under the current system will not meet the zoning criteria of the RSAG in the future period; believes that these regions should have a special safety regime, similar to that for transition regions under the Cohesion Policy, allowing them to cope with their new situation; believes thus that the new category for transition regions in cohesion policy should be fully reflected in the RSAG in the future period, in order to have a more consistent approach between cohesion and competition rules;

2013/05/03
Committee: REGI

2013/0000(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17 a. Emphasizes the importance of maintaining the maximum aid intensity level of the period 2007 - 2013 for the outermost regions; stresses that the notification procedures should be simplified and the ceiling of exemptions of notifications should be raised for beneficiaries in the outermost regions;

2013/05/03
Committee: REGI

2013/0000(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 b (new)

17 b. Stresses the importance of extending the ban of relocation for companies that received State aid;

2013/05/03
Committee: REGI

2013/0000(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Michèle STRIFFLER, Astrid LULLING, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Michel DANTIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND, Agnès LE BRUN, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 c (new)

17 c. Requests an appropriate treatment for mountain areas and border areas to simplify the rules on state aid for cross- border projects and to reduce the gap of aid intensity between two border regions;

2013/05/03
Committee: REGI

2012/2308(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 4

– having regard to its stated position on these matters, in particular in its recommendation from 21 June 1958, its resolution of 7 July 1981 adopting the Zagari Report, its recommendations for the Intergovernmental Conference of 13 April 2000, and its accompanying resolutions to 2010/2211(INI), 2011/2202(DEC), 2012/2001(BUD), 2012/2006(BUD) and 2012/2016(BUD),deleted

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Citation 6

~~– having regard to the Secretary- General’s report to the Bureau of September 2002 regarding the cost of maintaining three places of work,~~deleted

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Citation 10

~~– having regard to the petition gathered in 2006 by the One Seat campaign, which was signed by more than 1.2 million EU citizens,~~deleted

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Doris PACK, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph A a (new)

Aa. whereas the European Parliament has had its seat in Strasbourg since 1952, a situation confirmed by the Edinburgh European Council in 1992 and by the Treaty of Amsterdam in 1997, and not altered by the Lisbon Treaty;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Philippe BOULLAND, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Doris PACK, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Agnès LE BRUN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph A b (new)

Ab. whereas the real annual cost of retaining the Strasbourg seat in 2010 was EUR 51.5 million, i.e. 0.04 % of the annual budget of the European Union or 10 cents per citizen per year;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Philippe BOULLAND, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Doris PACK, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph A c (new)

Ac. whereas the gross cost of holding plenary sessions in Strasbourg is EUR 7 445 000 per part-session, and whereas 80 % of these costs are fixed and would be incurred irrespective of where a given part-session is held (equipment, publications, translation, etc.);

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Doris PACK, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph A d (new)

Ad. whereas mobility is an intrinsic aspect of the work of an MEP, requiring at least a large number of journeys between the European Parliament, the MEP’s Member State of origin and the constituency in which the MEP was elected;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Jean-Pierre AUDY, Agnès LE BRUN, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON, Rachida DATI

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas the protocols on the seats of the institutions are governed by mutual respect for the respective powers of the Member States and of Parliament;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas Article 232 TFEU ~~allow~~requires Parliament to adopt its own rules of procedure ~~and to determine the length of plenary session~~by a majority of its Members;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Jean-Pierre AUDY, Agnès LE BRUN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the ECJ has stated that the location of the seat is not to hinder the well-functioning of Parliament; whereas it has further stated that there are disadvantages and costs engendered by the plurality of working locations, but also that ~~any improvement of the current situation requires a Treaty change and, thus, the consent of~~responsibility for remedying this lies neither with Parliament nor with the Court, but, rather, by exercising their exclusive power to determine the seats of the institutions, with the Member States;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas on two occasions, in 1997 and 2012, the Court of Justice of the European Union pointed out that the fact that Parliament’s seat is in Strasbourg is determined by the TFEU; whereas it has also confirmed Protocol No 6 in clarifying the conditions for the application thereof; whereas it has fully acknowledged the power of Parliament to determine its own internal organisational arrangements, since Parliament may adopt appropriate measures to ensure its proper functioning and proper conduct of its proceedings, but the question of determining its seat does not come within that remit;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Agnès LE BRUN, Jean-Pierre AUDY, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas Parliament has undergone a complete transformation, from a consultative body with 78 seconded members that – mostly for practical reasons – shared its facilities with the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe in Strasbourg, into a fully fledged, directly elected Parliament with 754 members thatcomprises 754 Members elected by direct universal suffrage and is today co-legislator on equal terms with the Council;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas Strasbourg has been the meeting place of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe since 1949 and then, from 1952, played host to the Parliamentary Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Jean-Pierre AUDY, Agnès LE BRUN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital E b (new)

Eb. whereas the seat of the European Parliament in Strasbourg was confirmed by the Edinburgh European Council in 1992 and the Amsterdam Treaty in 1997 and then incorporated in the Lisbon Treaty in 2009;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Agnès LE BRUN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas ~~this is most clearly illustrated by~~ the growth of its legislative capacity~~, as reflec~~ is illustrated inby the increase in the number of co-decision procedures (now ordinary legislative procedures) from 165 in 1993- 1999 to 454 in 2004-2009, to an even greater number in the current legislature;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Jean-Pierre AUDY, Agnès LE BRUN, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas the increase in legislative activity and responsibility is reflected in the fact that the number of statutory staff in Brussels increased by 377 % (from 1 180 to 5 635 staff members) from 1993 to 2013, by far exceeding the 48 % increase in the number of MEPs in the same periodincrease in staff at Parliament’s three places of work;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Arnaud DANJEAN, Michèle STRIFFLER, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph C

C. whereas since 2006 attempts by the Petitions Committee to consider this issue on a parliamentary level have ~~repeatedly been obstruct~~not yet succeeded despite the widespread interest in the issue amongst MEPs;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe JUVIN, Jean-Pierre AUDY, Agnès LE BRUN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON, Philippe BOULLAND

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the structure of Parliament’s calendar (fixed during the Edinburgh Summit in 1992) ~~predates all changes to its role~~has not been called into question, since it was confirmed in Protocol No 6 annexed to the Treaty of Lisbon, and the increase in Parliament’s powers arising from the adoption of the Treaties of Maastricht, Amsterdam, Nice and Lisbon has therefore been taken into account;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON, Françoise GROSSETÊTE

Motion for a resolution
Recital I a (new)

Ia. whereas all the countries which have joined the European Union have ratified Protocol No 6;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Jean-Pierre AUDY, Agnès LE BRUN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas the Council and the European Council have already concentrated their work in Brussels, where all European Council meetings – which previously were always held in the country of the rotating presidency – are now exclusively held;deleted

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Jean-Pierre AUDY, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital L

L. whereas the fact of geographical distance between the official seats of the co- legislative bodies ~~– 435 km – isolates Parliament not only from~~reflects the multi- centre principle with regard to the seats of the European institutions and, during part-sessions, the attention of the Council and the Commission, but also of~~rom~~ other stakeholders, such as NGOs, civil society organisations and Member State representations, and of~~rom~~ one of the world’s largest international journalistic communities, is fully focused on the work of Parliament;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Rachida DATI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital M

M. whereas the additional annual costs resulting from the geographic dispersion of Parliament have conservatively been estimated to range between EUR 169 million and EUR 204 million4, which is equivalent to between 15 % and 20 % of Parliament’s annual budget, while the environmental impact is also significant, with the CO2 emissions associated with the transfers to and from the three working locations estimated to amount to at least 19 000 tonnes5; __________________ 5 ‘European Parliament two-seat operation: Environmental costs, transport & energy’, report prepared by Eco-Logica Ltd. for the Greens/EFA, November 2007.deleted

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Arnaud DANJEAN, Astrid LULLING, Alain CADEC, Michèle STRIFFLER, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND, Michel DANTIN, Agnès LE BRUN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital M – footnote 5

~~5 ‘European Parliament two-seat operation: Environmental costs, transport & energy’, report prepared by Eco-Logica Ltd. for the Greens/EFA, November 2007.~~deleted

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND, Michel DANTIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Jean-Pierre AUDY, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas 78 % of all missions by Parliament statutory staff (on average, 3 172 each month) arise as a direct result of its geographic dispersion; whereas while Parliament’s buildings in Strasbourg are currently only being used 42 days per year (remaining unused for 89 % of the time), they need to be heated, staffed and maintained for the entire year;deleted

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Agnès LE BRUN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital O

~~O. whereas the expenditure arising from the geographic dispersion of Parliament constitutes an important area of potential savings, particularly in the current economic climate;~~deleted

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Doris PACK, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Arnaud DANJEAN, Michèle STRIFFLER, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recalls that only the Member States have the power to amend the Treaties, the substance of which is binding on the Institutions and their members, and that a vote on this subject can only be carried unanimously;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Agnès LE BRUN, Jean-Pierre AUDY, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital P

P. whereas Parliament, since its suggestion in 1958 to be sited in proximity to the Council and the Commission, has ~~via numerous reports, declarations and statements always~~often expressed its wish for a more practical and efficient working arrangement;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Doris PACK, Arnaud DANJEAN, Michèle STRIFFLER, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Recalls that, on this basis, twelve monthly plenary part-sessions, including the budgetary part-session, must be held at the Strasbourg seat, while additional part-sessions are held in Brussels;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Rachida DATI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Recital Q

~~Q. whereas citizens of the EU – including the 1.27 million citizens who signed a petition asking for a single seat – have repeatedly expressed their discontent with the current arrangements;~~deleted

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Doris PACK, Agnès LE BRUN, Arnaud DANJEAN, Michèle STRIFFLER, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Stresses that the additional part- sessions entail a substantial additional cost, which could be reduced by extending ordinary part-sessions in Strasbourg;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Doris PACK, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Agrees with the principle that the European Parliament would be more effective, cost-efficient and respectful of the environment if it were located in a single place; and notes that the continuation of the monthly migration between Brussels and Strasbourg has become a symbolic negative issue amongst most EU citizens which is detrimental to Parliament’s reputation;deleted

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Rachida DATI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

~~1. Believes that Parliament should have the right to determine its own working arrangements, including the right to decide where and when it holds its meetings;~~deleted

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Philippe BOULLAND, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Emphasises the environmental example set by the European Parliament’s seat in Strasbourg, which reduced its CO2 emissions by 57% between 2006 and 2010 by taking special measures, meaning that these now represent 3.6% of all Parliament’s CO2 emissions;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Rachida DATI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Respects the historical reasons for the location of its plenary sessions in Strasbourg and the Treaty requirements that necessitate the system of a single seat and three places of work;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Rachida DATI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Emphasises that European integration necessarily entails mobility and that this applies to all national and European political representatives and officials, and that mobility is an intrinsic aspect of the work of MEPs, as representatives of the citizens of the European Union;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Rachida DATI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 c (new)

1c. Considers that decentralisation of the legislative authority away from Brussels strengthens its independence;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Points to the economic and social importance of the European Parliament for the Strasbourg region;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Rachida DATI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 d (new)

1d. Considers that the choice of the EU institutions’ seats has always been guided by a desire to bring the Union as close to ordinary people as possible and not to concentrate it in one place;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Doris PACK, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 c (new)

2c. Points to the tradition of geographical diversity in the siting of EU institutions;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Doris PACK, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 d (new)

2d. Stresses that concentrating EU powers in the city of Brussels would adversely effect the way the European public views the EU;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND, Michel DANTIN, Philippe JUVIN, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Jean-Pierre AUDY, Agnès LE BRUN, Rachida DATI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Commits itself, therefore, to initiate an ordinary treaty revision procedure under Article 48 TEU with a view to propose the changes to Article 341 TFEU and to Protocol 6 necessary to allow Parliament to decide fully over its internal organisation, including the setting of its calendar and the location of its seat;deleted

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Doris PACK, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Arnaud DANJEAN, Michèle STRIFFLER, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 e (new)

2e. Emphasises that Strasbourg has come to be viewed by the public as the European capital of democracy and human rights owing to the institutions that are based there, among them the European Parliament;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Doris PACK, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 f (new)

2f. Emphasises that the public associates the city of Brussels with the European Commission, while the city of Strasbourg continues to be associated with the European Parliament;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Philippe BOULLAND, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Agnès LE BRUN, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 g (new)

2g. Expresses concern at the steady increase (+23.8% between 2006 and 2010) in the number of committee, political group and delegation meetings held outside the European Parliament’s places of work;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Agnès LE BRUN, Rachida DATI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Emphasises that the Committee’s report was prepared under the ordinary own-initiative procedure and there is thus no obligation to implement the proposals, and further that the matter of the EU institutions’ seats is governed directly by the Treaties and is therefore subject to the political will of the Member States acting unanimously;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Rachida DATI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)

2b. Recalls that the Court of Justice of the EU has held that Parliament, during the proceedings before the Court, did not adduce reasons based on the exercise of its power of internal organisation sufficient to show – despite the continuous increase in its powers – that it had the power to alter the timetable of part-sessions; stresses, therefore, that the European Parliament likewise does not now have the power to decide where its seat should be;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Philippe BOULLAND, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 h (new)

2h. Notes that the carbon footprint for travel in connection with these meetings was 6 350 tonnes of CO2 en 2010, while for the seat in Strasbourg it was 4 199 tonnes that year;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 i (new)

2i. Notes that economic and environmental costs could be rationalised by limiting the number of meetings held outside the European Parliament’s official places of work;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Philippe JUVIN, Agnès LE BRUN, Rachida DATI, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Points out that this own-initiative report must not be used as a means of disregarding the EU Treaties, which provide that the seat of the European Parliament shall be in Strasbourg and that 12 part-sessions per year shall be held there;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Astrid LULLING, Michèle STRIFFLER, Alain CADEC, Jean-Marie CAVADA, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Michel DANTIN, Philippe BOULLAND, Nathalie GRIESBECK, Agnès LE BRUN, Françoise GROSSETÊTE, Rachida DATI, Véronique MATHIEU HOUILLON

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)

4b. Observes that, if a debate were initiated concerning the seat of the European Parliament, it would inevitably lead to discussion of the distribution of all the seats of the European Institutions, which is laid down in the Treaty;

2013/07/05
Committee: AFCO

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Respects the historic reasons for the location of its plenary sessions in Strasbourg and the Treaty requirements that necessitate the two-seat system; ~~nevertheless insists that such an arrangement cannot continue in perpetuity and that Parliament itself must be able to state a preference for its future;~~

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Doris PACK, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Underscores the symbolic and historical importance of the European Parliament’s location in Strasbourg as part of the process of European reconciliation;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Doris PACK, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Recognises the educational and civic value of Parliament’s Strasbourg seat, which attracts 100 000 visitors a year outside part-session periods, as well as 10 000 students on the Euroscola programme;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Doris PACK, Marie-Christine VERGIAT, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Recognises that efforts are needed to improve working conditions during ordinary part-sessions in Strasbourg;

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2308(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Doris PACK, Michèle STRIFFLER, Arnaud DANJEAN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls for Parliament to express its view as to whether the current arrangement should continue; and if an appropriate majority vote is recorded, recommends that Parliament propose Treaty changes under Article 48.deleted

2013/06/24
Committee: PETI

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 19 a (new)

– having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions of 30 May 20132,

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

1Ca. whereas in its working document of 26 September 20121, the Commission recognised the importance of the high-end cultural and creative economic sector (fashion, jewellery watches, perfumes and cosmetics, accessories, leather goods, furniture and furnishings, household equipment, gastronomy, wines and spirits, cars, boats, hotels and leisure experience, retail and auction houses and publishing), and whereas high-end companies can act as a driving force for all the CCS; Or. fr SWD(2012)0286.

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the development of new economic models for online access to cultural works is booming and should be encouraged by a stable legal framework which promotes investment in the CCS;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that the CCS are performing well economically and continuing to create jobs , particularly for young people, in spite of the difficulties currently facing the economies of the Union;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses the need for recent, reliable statistics on the CCS, in particular as regards their actual situation and their potential in terms of jobs and growth, so as to be able to decide on the most appropriate political action to promote these sectors effectively;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Emphasises the very disparate nature of the cultural and creative ecosystem, and stresses the need to address this by promoting the emergence of a common identity through the creation of areas of dialogue in order to create new links between actors and to enable skills and knowledge to be transferred to and from other branches of the economy;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Urges the EU and the Member States to promote and recognise the visibility of the cultural and creative sectors, which make up Europe’s ‘cultural exception’;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for a territorial basis to be developed and for exchanges to be optimised so as to attract investors in order to enable the various cultural and creative enterprises (VSBs, SMEs, NGOs and cultural institutions) to continue to promote growth and create jobs;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Stresses the importance of promoting mutual knowledge and transfer of the skills and knowledge essential to collaboration between creative enterprises through competitiveness clusters, excellence initiatives and networking, and thereby creating a common culture for the CCS, encouraging the various sectors to work together in order to cope with the new economic and societal challenges more effectively;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Points out that professionals in the CCS must be guaranteed a social status so that they are able to enjoy satisfactory working conditions and appropriate measures with regard to tax systems, their right to work, social security rights and copyright in order to improve their mobility across the EU;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Stresses the importance of improving training, learning and qualification systems, including by offering students in cultural and arts disciplines training which is tailored to today’s professional needs, in order to bring business and teaching closer together and to ensure effective implementation in all the Member States;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Commission to recognise the specific nature of the master crafts, which are genuine sources of European jobs that are based on four criteria common to all the high-end CCS: innovation and creativity; excellence and aestheticism; know-how and technology; and career-long learning and promotion of knowledge;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Considers that art and cultural education is a prerequisite for equal opportunities as it helps schoolchildren to cultivate themselves by developing their artistic abilities, meeting artists, viewing works of art and visiting places of cultural value;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Points out that closer links must be forged between universities and the creative and cultural sectors with a view to making these job-rich sectors more competitive, and calls for the establishment of a platform for exchanges and of alliances and partnerships to help participants think and act in a manner likely to lead to collective success;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Stresses the need to support the European funding of the cultural and creative sectors, including in times of economic crisis; expressly asks the European Parliament to push for an ambitious and substantial culture budget; calls, therefore, on the Council not to reduce the budget allocated by the Commission for the ‘Creative Europe’ programme;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 b (new)

13b. Emphasises the importance of developing consultancy and advisory services in respect of business financing and management to help SMEs and VSBs master the requisite tools for good corporate governance, with a view to improving the creation, production, promotion and distribution of cultural goods and services;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Calls on the Council, the Commission and the Member States to take the action required by recommending mixed methods of funding, particularly public-private partnerships;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Takes the view that, in the audiovisual sector, the contribution of audiovisual services to the funding of European audiovisual works is essential to support creative endeavours and should be strengthened by the clear and quantified transposition of the Audiovisual Media Services Directive 1;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Calls, therefore, on the Member States and the Commission to use existing and future tools and programmes, such as MEDIA or the Creative Europe programme’s guarantee mechanism, and to take specific measures to facilitate access by CCS stakeholders to the funding available under these instruments;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18 a (new)

18a. Highlights the exponential growth in the use of innovative digital services to access cultural works, and stresses the need to ensure a stable ecosystem that encourages investment in the CCS, job creation in Europe and the promotion of innovative business models;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls, therefore, on the Commission to develop a regulatory framework which is adapted to the specific features of these sectors, particularly as regards respect for IPR, and advocates better sharing of responsibilities throughout the digital value chain, paying due account to the competitiveness of the CCS;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Stresses in this connection the important role played by collecting societies in providing access to cultural heritage by enforcing IPR effectively and simplifying formalities for users;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Stresses the need for the EU and its Member States to devise and draft, in accordance with the UNESCO Convention of 2005, policies in favour of cultural diversity that are suited to the digital age;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 b (new)

20b. Emphasises in this connection the need to keep the cultural and audiovisual outside the scope of the negotiating mandate for the EU-USA free-trade agreement, while pointing out that cultural and creative works are not goods like any others;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 c (new)

20c. Stresses the need to strengthen policies on the digitisation of works to promote access to as many works of European cultural heritage as possible;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 d (new)

20d. Calls on the Commission to propose suitable instruments to enable the CCS to export to the international markets under the right conditions;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 e (new)

20e. Points out that that culture has indirect effects on other economic sectors; calls, therefore, on the CCS to step up cooperation with other sectors such as ICT and tourism with a view to meeting the challenges of digital technology, globalisation and access to international markets;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Stresses the importance of regional cultural and creativity policies, and hence the central role of local and regional authorities in promoting and supporting the CCS by making use of the right instruments and financing arrangements;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Stresses the importance of culture in the social and economic revitalisation of cities; urges the Commission to support peer learning among city administrations with a view to encouraging local- government policymakers to share good practices.

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Stresses the important role played by the CCS as a lever for growth and development at local and regional level, particularly by promoting cultural heritage, tourism and centres of excellence, by helping to make regions attractive, restructuring the socioeconomic fabric, developing new activities and creating stable and sustainable jobs;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2302(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Takes the view, therefore, that the territorialisation requirements that come with certain regional or national cinema aid measures help maintain this link between culture and geography and should, in accordance with the conditions laid down in the 2001 Cinema communication1, be maintained;

2013/06/01
Committee: CULT

2012/2100(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas, owing to their economic interdependence and shared features, the component parts of many cross-border regions – for example, traditional mining, steelmaking and textile manufacturing regions – are faced with the same industrial challenges;

2013/03/22
Committee: REGI

2012/2100(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas Member States, regions and cities in the EU are facing financial constraints; whereas, in particular, areas with an old industrial base are often not well positioned to attract sufficient funds for conversion; whereas EU funding to aid reconversion and restructuring efforts is indispensable for supporting regional and cross-border policy approaches;

2013/03/22
Committee: REGI

2012/2100(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital H a (new)

Ha. whereas reindustrialisation policies fail to take proper account of the cultural and creative industries, which are a key potential source of growth, innovation and jobs, contribute to social cohesion and provide an effective means of combating the current recession;

2013/03/22
Committee: REGI

2012/2100(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Calls for more integrated and systemic approaches to industrial renewal and regional development, and for increased coherence between the different policies at EU, national ~~and~~, regional and cross-border level;

2013/03/22
Committee: REGI

2012/2100(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that the success of such an industrial renewal, coupled with regional development, depends on the existence of effective policies in areas such as cohesion policy, economic governance, competitiveness, research and innovation, energy, the digital agenda, sustainable development, the cultural and creative industries, new qualifications and jobs, etc;

2013/03/22
Committee: REGI

2012/2100(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 – point 9 a (new)

• the introduction of cross-border employment, innovation, training, environmental rehabilitation and regional attractiveness strategies;

2013/03/22
Committee: REGI

2012/2100(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Reiterates that where old industrialised regions have tried to explore new opportunities for regional development, they have been most successful where they have based these strategies on their past features, their territorial assets, their industrial heritage, and their experiences and capacities;

2013/03/22
Committee: REGI

2012/2100(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Welcomes the benefits deriving from European capital of culture status, as exemplified by Glasgow, Lille, and other cities and urban agglomerations that used to suffer industrial decline, and maintains that culture and creative activity are key catalysts for urban regeneration and regional attractiveness;

2013/03/22
Committee: REGI

2012/2099(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas the cohesion policy investments in the area of energy could contribute to the realisation of both policies by promoting ~~growth in underdeveloped~~sustainable growth in all regions and local job creation, and ensuring security of energy supply across the whole EU;

2012/11/30
Committee: REGI

2012/2099(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Emphasises, in view of the crisis’ negative effect of increasing local and regional disparities in Europe, the need for strong EU support for cohesion; believes that European energy projects could contribute to regional development through investments in ~~decentralised~~renewable or low-carbon energy sources, energy efficiency and other measures which support sustainable growth and jobs;

2012/11/30
Committee: REGI

2012/2099(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses, however, that the cohesion policy programmes should ~~not be seen as a replac~~complement ~~for~~ the proper funding of European energy policy proposals; ~~stresses that cohesion policy can support actions, such as energy efficiency measures, as an additional source of funding, but only when these programmes~~is in favour of the Commission’s proposal to concentrate part of cohesion policy funding on actions targeting the transition to a low-carbon economy in all sectors, and on encouraging energy efficiency in particular, as this would promote the cohesion policy objectives;

2012/11/30
Committee: REGI

2012/2099(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that the regions of Europe should be able to focus on those ~~energy~~ sources of sustainable energy which are best suited to the local conditions and that the EU should start measuring European energy objectives on an EU-wide scale;

2012/11/30
Committee: REGI

2012/2099(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses, that, owing to the EU’s climate change objectives, developments in energy pricing may place citizens in ~~the less developed~~ EU regions at a particular disadvantage; asks, therefore, that this be considered within cohesion policy planning;

2012/11/30
Committee: REGI

2012/2099(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Notes that, while Member States are changing their energy mixes in accordance with the EU’s climate goals, many regions are dependent on fossil fuels; believes, therefore, that ~~not only low-carbon, but all low-emission sources of energy, such as shale gas, ought to be accepted, including those of a transitional nature~~all these regions ought to be encouraged to use sources of energy compatible with the goals of smart, sustainable and inclusive growth;

2012/11/30
Committee: REGI

2012/2099(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)

13a. Encourages use of the European territorial cooperation objective and the Connecting Europe Facility to implement cross-border strategies on efficient energy production, distribution and use; emphasises the importance of adapting EU rules on energy infrastructure managers to the cross-border context;

2012/11/30
Committee: REGI

2012/2099(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Believes that ~~excluding projects which might come under~~only greenhouse gas reduction projects targeting the installations listed in Annex 1 to Directive 2003/87/EC should be excluded from the ERDF and the CF ~~is likely to have~~, so as not to engender a disproportionalte effect on less developed regions and delay their transition to low- emission regions; asks the Commission to further clarify and define which energy sectors would not be eligible for cohesion policy funding and to withdraw this exclusion from projects located in convergence regions;

2012/11/30
Committee: REGI

2012/2099(INI)

Jean-Pierre AUDY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Notes the imbalance in sustainable resource use between different Member States,; stresses the economies of scales possible through cross-border cooperation on sustainable use of resources and energy efficiency; takes the view that measures to support resource efficiency and the recycling of materials should be stepped up;

2012/11/30
Committee: REGI

2012/2098(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Encourages Member States to integrate CSR into relevant education curricula, and in particular into language learning and the appreciation of multilingualism;

2012/11/16
Committee: CULT

2012/2097(INI)

Jean-Pierre AUDY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Encourages Member States to integrate CSR into relevant education curricula, and in particular into language learning and the appreciation of multilingualism;

2012/11/16
Committee: CULT

2012/2045(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas in~~adequate~~sufficient language knowledge continues to be an enormous obstacle to learning mobility;

2012/05/15
Committee: CULT

2012/2045(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas providing all children with quality early-childhood facilities and education is an investment in the future and provides a great benefit both for the individual and for society;

2012/05/15
Committee: CULT

2012/2045(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital K

K. whereas Early School Leaving (ESL) has serious consequences for ~~the individual~~young people and for the EU’s social and economic growth;

2012/05/15
Committee: CULT

2012/2045(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses that the Education and Training 2020 strategic framework ought to stimulate thinking about the best way of investing in education and training so as to link efficiency and effectiveness to a positive impact on growth;

2012/05/15
Committee: CULT

2012/2045(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Asks Member States to prioritise expenditures in education and training, research and innovation that are considered to be investments for future growth, but at the same time ensuring the added value of such investment;

2012/05/15
Committee: CULT

2012/2045(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the EU institutions to make further efforts to elaborate ~~better,~~ clearer and more targeted youth policies at EU level which are tailored to society’s new challenges; the current generation of young people feels that it will not be able to attain the same level of prosperity as the previous one did;

2012/05/15
Committee: CULT

2012/2045(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. In particular, asks the Member States to ~~target, with the Commission’s support, young people that are not in~~implement measures targeted at young people likely to leave school early, to give special attention to vocational education, and training or employment, to promote quality traineeships so that young people can gain real work experience and quickly enter the job market and to give special attention to vocational education and training in tertiary education systemsin tertiary education systems, and calls on them to step up their efforts to make further progress in combating early school leaving so that young people can gain real work experience and quickly enter the job market;

2012/05/15
Committee: CULT

2012/2045(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Calls on the European Commission to encourage and help Member States to put in place measures to assist children in genuine educational pathways, from a very early age;

2012/05/15
Committee: CULT

2012/2045(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11 a. Stresses the need for professional early years facilities to address the social development of children, particularly for families experiencing social difficulties;

2012/05/15
Committee: CULT

2012/2045(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Highlights the need for the acquirement of language skills since ithese enables people to be more mobile; and promote European integration;

2012/05/15
Committee: CULT

2012/2045(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Recognises the important contribution of the EU Year for Active Ageing and Solidarity between Generations 2012, and recalls that it is important for the EU that its citizens be given the opportunity to engage in learning, in all its forms, until late in life, and to involve older learners in dialogue with professionals who work in the services that provide and support learning;

2012/05/15
Committee: CULT

2012/2045(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. Stresses the need to promote existing European tools, particularly the Structural Funds for training;

2012/05/15
Committee: CULT

2012/2045(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17 a. Emphasises that it is necessary to encourage mobility for language learning purposes in order to encourage learners to acquire skills in at least two foreign languages;

2012/05/15
Committee: CULT

2012/2042(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Underlines the need for better coordination and synergy between different European, national and regional polices directly addressing SMEs; points out that existing initiatives and financial instruments for SME support should be more coherent, and should complement each other; stresses the need to reduce fragmentation, to promote and to consolidate financial support schemes for SMEs and facilitate access by closer monitoring, in order to ensure greater pooling and coordination of resources at European, regional and national levels;

2012/05/23
Committee: REGI

2012/2042(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission in particular to clarify the state support schemes, especially for SMEs, operating under cross-border cooperation programmes;

2012/05/23
Committee: REGI

2012/2030(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3 a. Underlines that the Digital Single Market will allow citizens to have access, throughout the EU, to all digital contents and services, whether they are musical, audiovisual, or a video game;

2012/06/06
Committee: CULT

2012/2030(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that new and expanding internet technologies and online services have increased demand for audiovisual and other cultural and creative digital content; notes, however, that there is currently insufficient legal supply to meet this demand ~~and that availability is being hampered by rights holders~~;

2012/06/06
Committee: CULT

2012/2030(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Welcomes the proposals for increasing availability and developing legal online content services~~, but highlights that this is inhibited by the EU's fragmented copyright system~~;

2012/06/06
Committee: CULT

2012/2030(INI)

Jean-Marie CAVADA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7 a. Recalls that Member States also have a role to play by veiling to a rapid and non-bureaucratic implementation of the EU rules, in order to make consumers' rights concrete;

2012/06/06
Committee: CULT

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) In order to set out an appropriate financial framework, the Commission should establish, by means of implementing acts, an annual breakdown of global resources by Member State using an objective and transparent method reflecting disparities in terms of poverty, relative poverty and material deprivation.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The operational programme of each Member State should identify and justify the forms of material deprivation to be addressed, and describe the objectives and features of the assistance to the most deprived persons that will be provided through the support of national schemes. ItFood insecurity should be the form of deprivation which Member States tackle before all others. The programme should also include elements necessary to ensure its effective and efficient implementation ~~of the operational programme~~.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) In order to improve the quality and design of each operational programme and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the Fund, ~~ex ante and ex post~~ evaluations should be conducted. Those evaluations should be supplemented by surveys on the most deprived persons who have benefited from the operational programme and, if necessary, by evaluations during the programming period. The responsibilities of Member States and the Commission in this respect should be specified.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX, Tokia SAÏFI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) Citizens have the right to know how the Union’s financial resources are invested and to what effects. For the purpose of ensuring wide dissemination of information about the achievements of the Fund and to ensure accessibility and transparency of funding opportunities, detailed rules about information and communication, especially in relation to the responsibilities of the Member States and the beneficiaries, should be set out in such a way that the dignity of the end recipients is not undermined.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX, Tokia SAÏFI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) Uniform ~~and~~, equitable and simple rules on the eligibility period, operations and expenditures for the Fund should be applied across the Union. The conditions of eligibility should reflect the specific nature of the Fund’s objectives and target populations, notably through simple and adequate conditions of eligibility of the operations as well as forms of support and rules and conditions of reimbursement.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX, Tokia SAÏFI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17 a (new)

(17a) In order to ensure broad support within society for the most deprived persons and to tackle food waste, Member States should remove obstacles to the donation of food or basic consumer goods by firms to food banks, civil society organisations and other stakeholders.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) In accordance with the principle of shared management, Member States should have the primary responsibility, through their management and control system, for the implementation and control of their operational programme, while seeking at all times to improve effectiveness and reduce bureaucracy.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) Member States should designate a managing authority, a certifying authority and a functionally independent auditing authority for their operational programme. To provide flexibility for Member States in the set-up of control systems, it is appropriate to provide the option for the functions of the certifying authority to be carried out by the managing authority. The Member States should also be allowed to designate intermediate bodies to carry out certain tasks of the managing authority orfor their operational programme the authorities responsible for the sound management of the Fund. Member States should carry out appropriate administrative and physical checks and provide for penalties in the case of irregularities in order to ensure that the coperati~~fying authority. The Member States should in that case lay down clearly their respective responsibilities and function~~onal programmes are implemented in accordance with the applicable rules.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) The managing authority bears the main responsibility for the effective and efficient implementation of the Fund and thus fulfils a substantial number of functions related to operational programme management and monitoring, financial management and controls as well as project selection. Its responsibilities and functions should be set out.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) The certifying authority should draw up and submit to the Commission payment applications. It should draw up the annual accounts, certifying the completeness, accuracy and veracity of the annual accounts and that the expenditure entered in the accounts complies with applicable Union and national rules. Its responsibilities and functions should be set out.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24

(24) The audit authority should ensure that audits are carried out on the management and control systems, on an appropriate sample of operations and on the annual accounts. Its responsibilities and functions should be set out.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25

(25) Without prejudice to the Commission's powers as regards financial control, cooperation between the Member States and the Commission in the framework of this Regulation should be ensured and criteria should be established which allow the Commission to determine, in the context of its strategy of control of national systems, the level of assurance it should obtain from national audit bodies.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26

(26) The powers and responsibilities of the Commission to verify the effective functioning of the management and control systems, and to require Member State action, should be laid down. The Commission should also have the power to carry out audits focused on issues relating to sound financial management in order to draw conclusions on the performance of the Fund.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX, Tokia SAÏFI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) Union budget commitments should be effected annually. In order to ensure effective programme management, it is necessary to lay down simple common rules for interim payment requests, the payment of the annual balance and the final balance.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX, Tokia SAÏFI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41 a (new)

(41a) In order to ensure that delays in the implementation of this Regulation at the beginning of 2014 do not lead to a sudden drop-off in food aid, the Commission should take the transitional measures necessary to guarantee that persons dependent on food aid are not at risk of food poverty.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX, Tokia SAÏFI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1

1. This Regulation establishes the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived (hereinafter ‘the Fund’) for the period from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020 and determines the objectives of the Fund, the scope of its support, the financial resources available and the criteria for their allocation and lays down the rules necessary to ensure th~~e effectiveness of the Fund~~at the Fund is effective and easy to implement.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX, Tokia SAÏFI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point 2

(2) '‘partner organisations'’ means public bodies or non-for-profit organisations that deliver the food orand possibly other essential goods directly or through other partner organisations to the most deprived persons, and whose operations have been selected by the managing authority in accordance with Article 29(3)(b);

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX, Tokia SAÏFI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point 6

(6) '‘beneficiary'’ means a ~~public or private body~~not-for-profit organisation or a public or private body, excluding commercial enterprises, responsible for initiating or initiating and implementing operations;

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX, Tokia SAÏFI

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point 9

(9) '‘intermediate body'’ means any ~~public or private body~~not-for- profit organisation or any public or private body, excluding commercial enterprises, which acts under the responsibility of a managing or certifying authority, or which carries out duties on behalf of such an authority in relation to beneficiaries'’ implementing operations;

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3

The Fund shall promote social cohesion in the Union by contributing to achieving the poverty reduction target of at least 20 million of the number of persons at risk of poverty and social exclusion in accordance with the Europe 2020 strategy. The Fund shall contribute to achieving the specific objective of alleviating the worst forms of poverty in the Union, and first and foremost food insecurity, by providing non- financial assistance to the most deprived persons. This objective shall be measured by the number of persons receiving assistance from the Fund.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 9

(9) The Commission and the Member States shall carry out their respective roles in relation to the Fund ~~with the aim~~, placing greater emphasis ofn reducing the administrative burden for beneficiaries.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 6

(6) Those provisions also ensure that the operations supported shall comply with applicable Union and national laws, notably in regard to the safety of the goods and the quality of the food products that are distributed to the most deprived persons.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX, Tokia SAÏFI

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) In order to set out an appropriate financial framework, the Commission should establish, by means of implementing acts, an annual breakdown of global resources by Member State using an objective and transparent method reflecting disparities in terms of poverty, relative poverty and material deprivation.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1

1. The global resources available for budgetary commitment from the Fund for the period 2014-2020 shall be EUR 23 500 000 000 at 2011 prices, in accordance with the annual breakdown set out in Annex II.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The operational programme of each Member State should identify and justify the forms of material deprivation to be addressed, giving priority to food deprivation, and describe the objectives and features of the assistance to the most deprived persons that will be provided through the support of national schemes. It should also include elements necessary to ensure effective and efficient implementation of the operational programme.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)

(8a) Member States should have the option of giving preference to products of Union origin.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a

(a) an identification of ~~and a justification for selecting~~ the type(s) of material deprivation to be addressed under the operational programme and a description for each type of material deprivation addressed of the main characteristics and the objectives of the distribution of food or goods and the accompanying measures to be provided~~, having regard to the results of the ex ante evaluation carried out in accordance with Article 14~~;

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10

(10) Exchanges of experience and best practices have a significant added value and the Commission should facilitate such promotion and dissemination.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) In order to improve the quality and design of each operational programme and evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of the Fund, ~~ex ante and ex post~~ evaluations should be conducted. Those evaluations should be supplemented by surveys on the most deprived persons who have benefited from the operational programme and, if necessary, by evaluations during the programming period. The responsibilities of Member States and the Commission in this respect should be specified.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)

(ba) the partner organisations and competent authorities;

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) Citizens have the right to know how the Union’s financial resources are invested and to what effects. For the purpose of ensuring wide dissemination of information about the achievements of the Fund and to ensure accessibility and transparency of funding opportunities, detailed rules about information and communication~~, especially in relation to the~~ and about the relevant responsibilities of the Member States and the beneficiaries, should be set out.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c

~~(c) a description of the mechanism setting the eligibility criteria for the most deprived persons, differentiated if necessary by type of material deprivation addressed;~~deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d

~~(d) the criteria for the selection of operations and a description of the selection mechanism differentiated if necessary by type of material deprivation addressed;~~deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e

~~(e) the criteria for the selection of the partner organisations differentiated if necessary by type of material deprivation address~~deleted;

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) It is necessary to establish a maximum level of co-financing from the Fund to the operational programmes to provide for a multiplier effect of Union resources, while ~~the situation of~~ensuring flexibility by providing solutions for Member States facing temporary budget difficulties ~~should be addressed~~.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point f

~~(f) a description of the mechanism used to ensure complementarity with the European Social Fund;~~deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16

(16) USimple, uniform and equitable rules on the eligibility period, operations and expenditures for the Fund should be applied across the Union. The conditions of eligibility should reflect the specific nature of the Fund’s objectives and target populations, notably through simple and adequate conditions of eligibility of the operations as well as forms of support and rules and conditions of reimbursement.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g

(g) a description of the provisions for implementing the operational programme containing the identification of the managing authority, the certifying authority where applicable, the audit authority and the body to which payments are to be made by the Commission and a description of the monitoring procedure;deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) [Proposal for a] Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation) provides that products bought under public intervention may be disposed of by making them available for the scheme for food distribution to the most deprived in the Union if that scheme so provides. Given that, depending on the circumstances, obtaining of food from the use, processing or sale of such stocks might be economically the most favourable option, it is appropriate to provide for such a possibility in this Regulation. The amounts derived from a transaction concerning the stocks should be used for the benefit of the most deprived, and should not be applied so as to diminish the obligation of the Member States to co- finance the programme. These amounts are additional to the budget of this Fund. In order to ensure the most efficient possible use of the intervention stocks and the proceeds thereof, the Commission should in accordance with Article 19(e) of the Regulation (EU) No [CMO] adopt implementing acts establishing procedures by which the products in intervention stocks may be used, processed or sold for the purposes of the most deprived programme.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point h

(h) a description of the measures taken to involve the competent regional, local and other public authorities as well as bodies representing civil society and bodies responsible for promoting equality and non-discrimination in the preparation of the operational programme;deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 19

(19) In accordance with the principle of shared management, Member States should have the primary responsibility, through their management and control system, for the implementation and control of their operational programme, while constantly seeking to improve effectiveness and reduce bureaucracy.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3

~~3. The Member States shall draft their operational programmes in accordance with the template set out in Annex I.~~deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) Member States should designate a managing authority, a certifying authority and a functionally independent auditing authority for their operational programme. To provide flexibility for Member States in the set-up of control systems, it is appropriate to provide the option for the functions of the certifying authority to be carried out by the managing authority. The Member States should also be allowed to designate intermediate bodies to carry out certafor their operational programme the authorities responsible for the sound management of the Fund. Member States should undertake adequate administrative and physical controls and provide for penalties in tcaskse of ~~the managing authority or~~irregularities in order to ensure that the coperati~~fying authority. The Member States should in that case lay down clearly their respective responsibilities and function~~onal programmes are implemented in accordance with the applicable rules.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1

1. The Commission shall assess the consistency of the operational programme with this Regulation and its contribution to the objectives of the Fund~~, taking into account the ex ante evaluation carried out in accordance with Article 14~~.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22

(22) The managing authority bears the main responsibility for the effective and efficient implementation of the Fund and thus fulfils a substantial number of functions related to operational programme management and monitoring, financial management and controls as well as project selection. Its responsibilities and functions should be set out.deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) The certifying authority should draw up and submit to the Commission payment applications. It should draw up the annual accounts, certifying the completeness, accuracy and veracity of the annual accounts and that the expenditure entered in the accounts complies with applicable Union and national rules. Its responsibilities and functions should be set out.deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title

Implementation reports ~~and indicators~~

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 24

(24) The audit authority should ensure that audits are carried out on the management and control systems, on an appropriate sample of operations and on the annual accounts. Its responsibilities and functions should be set out.deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2

~~2. The Member States shall draft the annual implementation report in accordance with the template adopted by the Commission, including the list of common input and outcome indicators.~~deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3

3. The annual implementation reports shall be admissible where they contain all the information required in accordance with the template referred in paragraph 2, including the common indicators. The Commission shall inform the Member State concerned within 15 working days from the date of receipt of the annual implementation report if it is not admissible. Where the Commission has not sent that information within the time limit, the report shall be deemed admissible.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25

(25) Without prejudice to the Commission’s powers as regards financial control, cooperation between the Member States and the Commission in the framework of this Regulation should be ensured and criteria should be established which allow the Commission to determine, in the context of its strategy of control of national systems, the level of assurance it should obtain from national audit bodies.deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2

~~The Member States shall draft the final implementation report in accordance with the template adopted by the Commission.~~deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 6

6. The Commission shall adopt the template for the annual implementation report~~, including the list of common indicators~~ and for the final implementation report by means of implementing act. This implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 60(2).

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 7

7. The Commission may address observations to a Member State concerning the implementation of the operational programme. ~~The managing authority shall within three months inform the Commission of the corrective measures taken.~~

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 26

(26) The powers and responsibilities of the Commission to verify the effective functioning of the management and control systems, and to require Member State action, should be laid down. The Commission should also have the power to carry out audits focused on issues relating to sound financial management in order to draw conclusions on the performance of the Fund.deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 8

~~8. The managing authority shall make public a summary of the contents of each annual and final implementation report.~~deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) Union budget commitments should be effected annually. In order to ensure effective programme management, it is necessary to lay down simple common rules for interim payment requests, the payment of the annual balance and the final balance.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 41 a (new)

(41a) To avoid a sudden cut in food aid if the implementation of this Regulation were to be delayed at the beginning of 2014, the Commission should take the transitional measures necessary to ensure that persons dependent on food aid would not suffer food poverty.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1

1. 1. Member States shall provide the resources necessary for carrying out evaluations, and shall ensure that procedures are in place to produce and collect the data necessary for evaluations~~, including data related to the common indicators referred to in Article 11~~.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14

Article 14 Ex ante evaluation 1. Member States shall carry out an ex ante evaluation of the operational programme. 2. The ex ante evaluation shall be carried out under the responsibility of the authority responsible for preparing the operational programmes. It shall be submitted to the Commission at the same time as the operational programme, together with an executive summary. 3. Ex ante evaluations shall appraise the following elements: (a) the contribution to the Union objective of at least 20 million fewer people at risk of poverty and social exclusion by 2020, having regard to the selected type of material deprivation to be addressed, taking into account national circumstances in terms of poverty and social exclusion and material deprivation; (b) the internal coherence of the proposed operational programme and its relation with other relevant financial instruments; (c) the consistency of the allocation of budgetary resources with the objectives of the operational programme; (d) contribution of the expected outputs to the results; (e) the suitability of the procedures for monitoring the operational programme and for collecting the data necessary to carry out evaluations.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 1

1. This Regulation establishes the Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived (hereinafter ‘the Fund’) for the period from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2020 and determines the objectives of the Fund, the scope of its support, the financial resources available and the criteria for their allocation and lays down the rules necessary to ensure the effectiveness and straightforwardness of the Fund.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 2

(2) ‘partner organisations’ means public bodies or nont-for-profit organisations that deliver the food and/or goods directly or through other partner organisations to the most deprived persons, and whose operations have been selected by the managing authority in accordance with Article 29(3)(b);

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2

2. The managing authority shall carry out a structured survey on end recipients in 2017 and 2021, in accordance with the template provided by the Commission. The Commission shall adopt the template by means of an implementing act. This implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 60(2).deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 6

(6) ‘beneficiary’ means a ~~public or private body~~not-for-profit organisation or a public or private body, excluding business enterprises, responsible for initiating or initiating and implementing operations;

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 9

(9) ‘intermediate body’ means any ~~public or private body~~not-for- profit organisation or any public or private body, excluding business enterprises, which acts under the responsibility of a managing or certifying authority, or which carries out duties on behalf of such an authority in relation to beneficiaries’ implementing operations;

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

The ~~managing~~competent authority shall, in order to ensure transparency in the support of the Fund, maintain a list of operations supported by the Fund in CSV or XML format which shall be accessible through a website. TFor each operation supported, the list shall include at least information on the ~~beneficiary name, its addres~~number of beneficiaries and the allocated amount of Union funding as well as the type of material deprivation addressed.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1

1. The Fund shall support national schemes whereby food products and basic consumer goods for the personal use of ~~homeless persons or of children~~the most deprived persons are distributed to th~~e most deprived~~ose persons through partner organisations selected by Member States.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5

5. The ~~managing~~competent authority shall inform beneficiaries of publication of the list of operations in accordance with paragraph 2. The managing authority shall provide information and publicity kits, including templates in electronic format, to help beneficiaries and partner organisations to meet their obligations as set out in paragraph 3.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6

6. In processing personal data pursuant to this Article, the ~~managing~~competent authority as well as the beneficiaries and partner organisations shall abide by all confidential data protection rules and comply with Directive 95/46/EC.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 12

(12). Member States and beneficiaries shall choose the food products and the goods on the basis of objective criteria, including nutritional value, in the case of food products, and ease of distribution. To that end, Member States may give preference to Union products. The selection criteria for the food products, and where appropriate for goods, shall also take into consideration climatic and environmental aspects, in particular with a view to reduction of food waste at every stage of the distribution chain.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1

1. The global resources available for budgetary commitment from the Fund for the period 2014-2020 shall be EUR 23 500 000 000 at 2011 prices, in accordance with the annual breakdown set out in Annex II.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3 – point b a (new)

(ba) the relative poverty threshold, i.e. the percentage of the population living in households with an income below 60% of the national median income.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a

(a) an identification of ~~and a justification for selecting~~ the type(s) of material deprivation to be addressed under the operational programme and a description for each type of material deprivation addressed of the main characteristics and the objectives of the distribution of food or goods and the accompanying measures to be provided~~, having regard to the results of the ex ante evaluation carried out in accordance with Article 14~~;

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2

2. Operations shall not be selected for support by the operational programme where they have been physically completed or fully implemented before the application for funding under the operational programme is submitted by the beneficiary to the ~~managing~~competent authority, irrespective of whether all related payments have been made by the beneficiary.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

The food and the goods for ~~homeless persons or for children~~personal use by the end recipients may be purchased by the partner organisations themselves.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point b a (new)

(ba) the partner organisations and competent authorities;

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c

~~(c) a description of the mechanism setting the eligibility criteria for the most deprived persons, differentiated if necessary by type of material deprivation addressed;~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4

4. That material assistance shall be distributed free of charge to the most deprived persons, or sold at a price no greater than 10% of the market price and not exceeding the distribution costs borne by the designated organisations.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) the costs of purchasing food and basic consumer goods for the personal use of ~~homeless persons or of children~~the final beneficiaries;

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point d

~~(d) the criteria for the selection of operations and a description of the selection mechanism differentiated if necessary by type of material deprivation addressed;~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point e

~~(e) the criteria for the selection of the partner organisations differentiated if necessary by type of material deprivation address~~deleted;

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point f

~~(f) a description of the mechanism used to ensure complementarity with the European Social Fund;~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) where a public body purchases the food or basic consumer goods for the personal use of ~~homeless persons or of children~~the final beneficiaries and provides them to partner organisations, the costs of transporting of food or goods to the storage depots of the partner organisations at a flat rate of 1 % of the costs referred to in point (a);

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g

(g) a description of the provisions for implementing the operational programme containing the identification of the managing authority, the certifying authority where applicable, the audit authority and the body to which payments are to be made by the Commission and a description of the monitoring procedure;deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point h

(h) a description of the measures taken to involve the competent regional, local and other public authorities as well as bodies representing civil society and bodies responsible for promoting equality and non-discrimination in the preparation of the operational programme;deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

The partner organisations referred to in point (eba) that deliver directly the food or goods shall themselves undertake activities complementing the provision of material assistance, aiming at the social inclusion of the most deprived persons, whether or not these activities are supported by the Fund.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 25 a (new)

Article 25a 1. Member States shall carry out administrative and physical checks to ensure that operational programmes are implemented in compliance with the applicable rules and shall establish the penalties applicable in the event of irregularities. 2. Member States shall fulfil the management, control and audit obligations and assume the resulting responsibilities laid down in the rules on shared management set out in the Financial Regulation and this Regulation. 3. Member States shall prevent, detect and correct irregularities and shall recover amounts unduly paid, together with any interest on late payments. 4. Member States shall establish and implement a procedure for the independent examination and resolution of complaints concerning the selection or implementation of operations cofinanced by the Fund.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26

Article 26 General principles of Member State management and control systems Management and control systems shall provide for: (a) a description of the functions of each body concerned in management and control, and the allocation of functions within each body; (b) compliance with the principle of separation of functions between and within such bodies; (c) procedures for ensuring the correctness and regularity of expenditure declared; (d) computerised systems for accounting, for the storage and transmission of financial data and data on indicators, for monitoring and for reporting; (e) systems for reporting and monitoring where the responsible body entrusts execution of tasks to another body; (f) arrangements for auditing the functioning of the management and control systems; (g) systems and procedures to ensure an adequate audit trail; (h) the prevention, detection and correction of irregularities, including fraud, and the recovery of amounts unduly paid, together with any interest;deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3

~~3. The Member States shall draft their operational programmes in accordance with the template set out in Annex I.~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27

Article 27 Responsibilities of Member States 1. Member States shall fulfil the management, control and audit obligations and assume the resulting responsibilities laid down in the rules on shared management set out in the Financial Regulation and this Regulation. In accordance with the principle of shared management, Member States shall be responsible for the management and control of operational programmes. 2. Member States shall prevent, detect and correct irregularities and shall recover amounts unduly paid, together with any interest on late payments. They shall notify these irregularities to the Commission and shall keep the Commission informed of the progress of related administrative and legal proceedings. When amounts unduly paid to a beneficiary cannot be recovered and this is as a result of fault or negligence on the part of a Member State, the Member State shall be responsible for reimbursing the amounts concerned to the general budget of the Union. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 59 laying down detailed rules concerning the obligations of the Member States specified in this paragraph. 3. Member States shall establish and implement a procedure for the independent examination and resolution of complaints concerning the selection or implementation of operations co-financed by the Fund. Member States shall report the results of such examinations to the Commission upon request. 4. All official exchanges of information between the Member State and the Commission shall be carried out using an electronic data exchange system established in compliance with the terms and conditions laid down by the Commission by means of implementing acts. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 60(3).deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28

Article 28 Designation and organisation of management and control bodies 1. The Member State shall designate a national public authority or body as managing authority. 2. The Member State shall designate a national public authority or body as a certifying authority, without prejudice to paragraph 3. 3. The Member State may designate a managing authority which carries out in addition the functions of the certifying authority. 4. The Member State shall designate a national public authority or body, functionally independent from the managing authority and the certifying authority, as audit authority. 5. Provided that the principle of separation of functions is respected, the managing authority, the certifying authority, where applicable, and the audit authority may be part of the same public authority or body. 6. The Member State may designate one or more intermediate bodies to carry out certain tasks of the managing or the certifying authority under the responsibility of that authority. The relevant arrangements between the managing authority or certifying authority and the intermediate bodies shall be formally recorded in writing. 7. The Member State or the managing authority may entrust the management of part of the operational programme to an intermediate body by way of an agreement in writing between the intermediate body and the Member State or managing authority. The intermediate body shall provide guarantees of its solvency and competence in the domain concerned, as well as its administrative and financial management. 8. The Member State shall lay down in writing rules governing its relations with the managing authority, certifying authority and audit authority, the relations between such authorities, and the relations of such authorities with the Commission.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1

1. The Commission shall assess the consistency of the operational programme with this Regulation and its contribution to the objectives of the Fund~~, taking into account the ex ante evaluation carried out in accordance with Article 14~~.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29

Article 29 Functions of the managing authority 1. The managing authority shall be responsible for managing the operational programme in accordance with the principle of sound financial management. 2. As regards the management of the operational programme, the managing authority shall: (a) draw up and submit to the Commission annual and final implementation reports; (b) make available to intermediate bodies and beneficiaries information that is relevant to the execution of their tasks and the implementation of operations respectively; (c) establish a system to record and store in computerised form data necessary for monitoring, evaluation, financial management, verification and audit; (d) ensure that the data referred to in point (c) is collected, entered and stored in the system, in compliance with the provisions Directive 95/46/CE. 3. As regards the selection of operations, the managing authority shall: (a) Draw up and apply appropriate selection procedures and criteria that are non-discriminatory and transparent; (b) ensure that the selected operation: (i) falls within the scope of the Fund and the operational programme; (ii) fulfils the criteria set out in the operational programme and in Articles 20, 21 and 24; (iii) takes into account the principles set out in Article 5(10), (11) and (12). (c) provide to the beneficiary a document setting out the conditions for support of each operation including the specific requirements concerning the products or services to be delivered under the operation, the financing plan, and the time-limit for execution; (d) satisfy itself that the beneficiary has the administrative, financial and operational capacity to fulfil the conditions defined in point (c) before approval of the operation; (e) satisfy itself that, where the operation has started before the submission of an application for funding to the managing authority, Union and national rules relevant for the operation have been complied with; (f) determine the type of material assistance to which the expenditure of an operation shall be attributed. 4. As regards the financial management and control of the operational programme, the managing authority shall: (a) verify that the co-financed products and services have been delivered and that expenditure declared by the beneficiaries has been paid by them and that it complies with applicable Union and national law, the operational programme and the conditions for support of the operation; (b) ensure that beneficiaries involved in the implementation of operations reimbursed pursuant to Article 23(1)(a) maintain either a separate accounting system or an adequate accounting code for all transactions relating to an operation; (c) put in place effective and proportionate anti-fraud measures taking into account the risks identified; (d) set up procedures to ensure that all documents regarding expenditure and audits required to ensure an adequate audit trail are held in accordance with the requirements of Article 26(g); (e) draw up the management declaration and annual summary referred to in Article 56 (5) (a) and (b) of the Financial Regulation. 5. Verifications pursuant to paragraph 4(a) shall include the following procedures: (a) administrative verifications in respect of each application for reimbursement by beneficiaries; (b) on-the-spot verifications of operations. The frequency and coverage of the on- the-spot verifications shall be proportionate to the amount of public support to an operation and the level of risk identified by these verifications and audits by the audit authority for the management and control system as a whole. 6. On-the-spot verifications of individual operations pursuant to paragraph (5)(b) may be carried out on a sample basis. 7. Where the managing authority is also a beneficiary under the operational programme, arrangements for the verifications referred to in paragraph 4(a) shall ensure adequate separation of functions. 8. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts, in accordance with Article 59, laying down the modalities of the exchange of information in paragraph 2(c). 9. The Commission shall adopt delegated acts, in accordance with Article 59, laying down rules concerning arrangements for the audit trail referred to in paragraph 4(d). 10. The Commission shall adopt, by means of implementing acts, the template for the management declaration referred to in paragraph 4(e). Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 60(2).deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30

Article 30 Functions of the certifying authority The certifying authority shall be responsible in particular for the following: 1. drawing up and submitting to the Commission payment applications and certifying that these result from reliable accounting systems, are based on verifiable supporting documents and have been subject to verifications by the managing authority; 2. drawing up the annual accounts referred to in Article 56 (5) (a) of the Financial Regulation; 3. certifying the completeness, accuracy and veracity of the annual accounts and that the expenditure entered in the accounts complies with applicable Union and national rules and has been incurred in respect of operations selected for funding in accordance to the criteria applicable to the operational programme and complying with Union and national rules; 4. ensuring that there is a system which records and stores, in computerised form, accounting records for each operation, and which supports all the data required for drawing up payment applications and annual accounts, including records of amounts recoverable, amounts recovered and amounts withdrawn following cancellation of all or part of the contribution for an operation or the operational programme; 5. ensuring for the purposes of drawing up and submission of payment applications that it has received adequate information from the managing authority on the procedures and verifications carried out in relation to expenditure; 6. taking into account when drawing up and submitting payment applications the results of all audits carried out by or under the responsibility of the audit authority; 7. maintaining accounting records in a computerised form of expenditure declared to the Commission and the corresponding public contribution paid to the beneficiaries; 8. keeping an account of amounts recoverable and of amounts withdrawn following cancellation of all or part of the contribution for an operation. Amounts recovered shall be repaid to the general budget of the Union prior to the closure of the operational programme by deducting them from the next statement of expenditure.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31

Article 31 Functions of the audit authority 1. The audit authority shall ensure that audits are carried out on the management and control systems, on an appropriate sample of operations and on the annual accounts. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 59 to set out the conditions which those audits shall fulfil. 2. Where audits are carried out by a body other than the audit authority, the audit authority shall ensure that any such body has the necessary functional independence. 3. The audit authority shall ensure that audit work takes account of internationally accepted audit standards. 4. The audit authority shall, within six months of adoption of the operational programme, prepare an audit strategy for performance of audits. The audit strategy shall set out the audit methodology, the sampling method for audits on operations and the planning of audits in relation to the current accounting year and the two subsequent accounting years. The audit strategy shall be updated annually from 2016 until and including 2022. The audit authority shall submit the audit strategy to the Commission upon request. 5. The audit authority shall draw up the following: (a) an audit opinion in accordance with Article 56 (5) of the Financial Regulation; (s) (b) an annual control report setting out the findings of the audits carried out during the preceding accounting year. The report under point (b) shall set out any deficiencies found in the management and control system and any corrective measures taken or proposed to be taken. 6. The Commission shall adopt, by means of implementing acts, models for the audit strategy, the audit opinion and the annual control report, as well as the methodology for the sampling method referred to in paragraph 4. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 60(3). 7. Implementing rules concerning the use of data collected during audits carried out by Commission officials or authorised Commission representatives shall be adopted by the Commission in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 60(3).deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32

Article 32 Procedure for designation of the managing and the certifying authorities 1. Member states shall notify to the Commission the date and form of the designation of the managing authority and, where appropriate the certifying authority, within six months of the adoption of decision adopting the operational programme. 2. The designation referred to in paragraph 1 shall be based on a report and an opinion of an independent audit body that assesses the management and control system, including the role of intermediate bodies therein, and its compliance with Articles 26, 27, 29 and 30, in accordance with criteria on internal environment, control activities, information and communication, and monitoring established by the Commission by means of delegated act in accordance with Article 59. 3. The independent body shall carry out its work in accordance with internationally accepted audit standards. 4. Member States may decide that a managing authority or a certifying authority which has been designated in relation to an ESF co-financed operational programme pursuant to Regulation (EU) No [CPR] is deemed to be designated for the purposes of this Regulation. The Commission may request, within two months of receipt of the notification referred to in paragraph 1, the report and the opinion of the independent audit body and the description of the management and control system. The Commission may make observations within two months of receipt of those documents. 5. The Member State shall supervise the designated body and withdraw its designation by formal decision if one or more of the criteria referred to in paragraph 2 are no longer met, unless the body takes the necessary remedial actions within a period of probation to be determined by the Member State according to the severity of the problem. The Member State shall notify the Commission immediately of the setting of any probation period for a designated body and of any withdrawal decision.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 2 a (new)

It shall set up and manage a public website specifically for the platform. The website shall provide all relevant documents and information with a view to facilitating the promotion and implementation of the Fund.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33

Article 33 Commission powers and responsibilities 1. The Commission shall satisfy itself on the basis of available information, including the information on the designation of the managing authority and the certifying authority, annual management declaration, annual control reports, annual audit opinion, annual implementation report and audits carried out by national and Union bodies, that the Member States have set up management and control systems that comply with this Regulation and that these systems function effectively during the implementation of operational programme. 2. Without prejudice to audits carried out by Member States, Commission officials or authorised Commission representatives may carry out on-the-spot audits or checks upon giving adequate prior notice. The scope of such audits or checks may include, in particular, verification of the effective functioning of management and control systems in an operational programme or a part thereof, operations and assessment of the sound financial management of operations or operational programme. Officials or authorised representatives of the Member State may take part in such audits. Commission officials or authorised Commission representatives, duly empowered to carry out on-the-spot audits, shall have access to all records, documents and metadata, irrespective of the medium in which they are stored, relating to operations supported by the Fund or to management and control systems. Member States shall provide copies of such records, documents and metadata to the Commission upon request. The powers set out in this paragraph shall not affect the application of national provisions which reserve certain acts for agents specifically designated by national legislation. Commission officials and authorised representatives shall not take part, inter alia, in home visits or the formal questioning of persons within the framework of national legislation. However, they shall have access to the information thus obtained. 3. The Commission may require a Member State to take the actions necessary to ensure the effective functioning of their management and control systems or the correctness of expenditure in accordance with this Regulation. 4. The Commission may require a Member State to examine a complaint submitted to the Commission concerning the implementation of operations co- financed by the Fund or the functioning of the management and control system.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – title

Implementation reports ~~and indicators~~

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2

~~2. The Member States shall draft the annual implementation report in accordance with the template adopted by the Commission, including the list of common input and outcome indicators.~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34

Article 34 Cooperation with audit authority 1. The Commission shall cooperate with audit authorities to coordinate their audit plans and methods and shall immediately exchange the results of audits carried out on management and control systems. 2. The Commission and the audit authority shall meet on a regular basis and at least once a year, unless otherwise agreed, to examine the annual control report, the opinion and the audit strategy, and to exchange views on issues relating to improvement of the management and control systems.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3

3. The annual implementation reports shall be admissible where they contain all the information required in accordance with the template referred in paragraph 2, including the common indicators. The Commission shall inform the Member State concerned within 15 working days from the date of receipt of the annual implementation report if it is not admissible. Where the Commission has not sent that information within the time limit, the report shall be deemed admissible.deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1

1. ~~Managing~~The competent authority shall ensure that, in the case of grants to partner organisations, beneficiaries are provided with a flow sufficient to ensure proper implementation of the operations.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2

~~The Member States shall draft the final implementation report in accordance with the template adopted by the Commission.~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2

2. ~~Managing~~The competent authority shall ensure that the beneficiaries receive the total amount of public support as quickly as possible and in full and in any event before the inclusion of the corresponding expenditure in the payment application. No amount shall be deducted or withheld and no specific charge or other charge with equivalent effect shall be levied that would reduce these amounts for the beneficiaries.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 6

6. The Commission shall adopt the template for the annual implementation report~~, including the list of common indicators~~ and for the final implementation report by means of implementing act. This implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 60(2).

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1

1. The c~~ertifying~~ompetent authority shall submit on a regular basis an application for interim payment covering amounts entered in its accounts as public support paid to beneficiaries in the accounting year ending 30 June.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 7

7. The Commission may address observations to a Member State concerning the implementation of the operational programme. ~~The managing authority shall within three months inform the Commission of the corrective measures taken.~~

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2

2. The c~~ertifying~~ompetent authority shall submit the final application for interim payment by 31 July following the end of the previous accounting year and, in any event, before the first application for interim payment for the next accounting year.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 8

~~8. The managing authority shall make public a summary of the contents of each annual and final implementation report.~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 3

3. The first application for interim payment shall not be made before the notification to the Commission of the designation of the ~~managing authority and the certifying~~competent authorityies in accordance to Article 32(1).

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43

Article 43 Interruption of the time limit payment 1. The time limit for the payment of an interim payment claim may be interrupted by the authorising officer by delegation within the meaning of the Financial Regulation for a maximum period of nine months when the following conditions are met: (a) on the basis of the information provided by a national or Union audit body, there is evidence to suggest a significant deficiency in the functioning of the management and control system; (b) the authorising officer by delegation has to carry out additional verifications following information coming to his attention alerting him that expenditure in a request for payment is linked to an irregularity having serious financial consequences; (c) there is a failure to submit one of the documents required under Article 45(1). 2. The authorising officer by delegation may limit the interruption to the part of the expenditure covered by the payment claim affected by the elements referred to in paragraph 1. The authorising officer by delegation shall inform the Member State and the managing authority immediately of the reason for interruption and shall ask them to remedy the situation. The interruption shall be ended by the authorising officer by delegation as soon as the necessary measures have been taken.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall provide the resources necessary for carrying out evaluations, and shall ensure that procedures are in place to produce and collect the data necessary for evaluations~~, including data related to the common indicators referred to in Article 11~~.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 44

Article 44 Suspension of payments 1. All or part of the interim payments may be suspended by the Commission where: (a) there is a serious deficiency in the management and control system of the operational programme for which corrective measures have not been taken; (b) expenditure in a statement of expenditure is linked to an irregularity having serious financial consequences which has not been corrected; (c) the Member State has failed to take the necessary action to remedy the situation giving rise to an interruption under Article 43; (d) there is a serious deficiency in the quality and reliability of the monitoring system or of the data on indicators. 2. The Commission may decide, by means of implementing acts, to suspend all or part of interim payments, after having given the Member State the opportunity to present its observations. 3. The Commission shall end suspension of all or part of interim payments where the Member State has taken the necessary measures to enable the suspension to be lifted.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14

1. Member States shall carry out an ex ante evaluation of the operational programme. 2. The ex ante evaluation shall be carried out under the responsibility of the authority responsible for preparing the operational programmes. It shall be submitted to the Commission at the same time as the operational programme, together with an executive summary. 3. Ex ante evaluations shall appraise the following elements: (a) the contribution to the Union objective of at least 20 million fewer people at risk of poverty and social exclusion by 2020, having regard to the selected type of material deprivation to be addressed, taking into account national circumstances in terms of poverty and social exclusion and material deprivation; (b) the internal coherence of the proposed operational programme and its relation with other relevant financial instruments; (c) the consistency of the allocation of budgetary resources with the objectives of the operational programme; (d) contribution of the expected outputs to the results; (e) the suitability of the procedures for monitoring the operational programme and for collecting the data necessary to carry out evaluations.Article 14 deleted Ex ante evaluation

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) the total amount of eligible expenditure entered into the accounts of the c~~ertifying~~ompetent authority as having been incurred and paid by beneficiaries in implementing operations, the total amount of public eligible expenditure incurred in implementing operations and the corresponding eligible public contribution which has been paid to beneficiaries;

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2

2. The c~~ertifying~~ompetent authority may specify in the accounts a provision, which shall not exceed 5 % of the total expenditure in payment applications presented for a given accounting year, where the assessment of the legality and regularity of the expenditure is subject to an on-going procedure with the audit authority. The amount covered shall be excluded from the total amount of eligible expenditure referred to in paragraph 1(a). These amounts shall be definitively included in, or excluded from, the annual accounts of the following year.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48

Article 48 Availability of documents 1. The managing authority shall ensure that all supporting documents on operations are made available to the Commission and the European Court of Auditors upon request for a period of three years. This three year period shall run from 31 December of the year of the decision on acceptance of accounts by the Commission pursuant to Article 47 or, at the latest, from the date of payment of the final balance. This three year period shall be interrupted either in the case of legal or administrative proceedings or by a duly justified request of the Commission. 2. The documents shall be kept either in the form of the originals, or certified true copies of the originals, or on commonly accepted data carriers including electronic versions of original documents or documents existing in electronic version only. 3. The documents shall be kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the data were collected or for which they are further processed. 4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 59 to set out which data carriers can be considered as commonly accepted. 5. The procedure for certification of conformity of documents held on commonly accepted data carriers with the original document shall be laid down by the national authorities and shall ensure that the versions held comply with national legal requirements and can be relied on for audit purposes. 6. Where documents exist in electronic version only, the computer systems used must meet accepted security standards that ensure that the documents held comply with national legal requirements and can be relied on for audit purposes.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15

Evaluation during the programming 1. During the programming period, the managing authority may carry out evaluations for assessing the effectiveness and efficiency of the operational programme. 2. The managing authority shall carry out a structured survey on end recipients in 2017 and 2021, in accordance with the template provided by the Commission. The Commission shall adopt the template by means of an implementing act. This implementing act shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 60(2). 3. The Commission may carry out, at its own initiative, evaluation of operational programmes.Article 15 deleted period

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 2

2. The Member State shall make the financial corrections required in connection with individual or systemic irregularities detected in operations or the operational programme. Financial corrections shall consist of cancelling all or part of the public contribution to an operation or the operational programme. The Member State shall take into account the nature and gravity of the irregularities and the financial loss to the Fund and shall apply a proportionate correction. Financial corrections shall be recorded in the annual accounts by the managing authority for the accounting year in which the cancellation is decided.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3

~~3. The contribution from the Fund cancelled in accordance with paragraph 2 may be reused by the Member State within the operational programme concerned, subject to paragraph 4.~~deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 4

4. The contribution cancelled in accordance with paragraph 2 may not be reused for any operation that was the subject of the correction or, where a financial correction is made for a systemic irregularity, for any operation affected by the systemic irregularity.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 5

~~5. A financial correction by the Commission shall not prejudice the Member State's obligation to pursue recoveries under the present Article.~~deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

The ~~managing~~competent authority shall, in order to ensure transparency in the support of the Fund, maintain a list of operations supported by the Fund in CSV or XML format which shall be accessible through a website. ~~The list shall include at least information on the beneficiary name, its address and allocated amount of Union funding as well as the type of material deprivation addressed.~~

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 51

Article 51 Financial corrections by the Commission 1. The Commission shall make financial corrections, by means of implementing act, by cancelling all or part of the Union contribution to an operational programme and effecting recovery from the Member State in order to exclude from Union financing expenditure which is in breach of applicable Union and national law, including in relation to deficiencies in the management and control systems of Member States which have been detected by the Commission or the European Court of Auditors. 2. A breach of applicable Union or national law shall lead to a financial correction only when one of the following conditions is met: (pp) the breach has or could have affected the selection of an operation by the managing authority for support by the Fund; (qq) the breach has or could have affected the amount of expenditure declared for reimbursement by the Union budget.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 52

Article 52 Criteria for financial correction by the Commission 1. The Commission shall make financial corrections after carrying out the necessary examination, it concludes that: (rr) there is a serious deficiency in the management and control system of the operational programme which has put at risk the Union contribution already paid to the operational programme; (ss) the Member State has not complied with its obligations under Article 50 prior to the opening of the correction procedure under this paragraph; (tt) expenditure contained in a payment application is irregular and has not been corrected by the Member State prior to the opening of the correction procedure under this paragraph. The Commission shall base its financial corrections on individual cases of irregularity identified and shall take account of whether an irregularity is systemic. When it is not possible to quantify precisely the amount of irregular expenditure charged to the Fund, the Commission shall apply a flat rate or extrapolated financial correction. 2. The Commission shall, when deciding the amount of a correction under paragraph 1, take account of the nature and gravity of the irregularity and the extent and financial implications of the deficiencies in management and control systems found in the operational programme. 3. Where the Commission bases its position on reports of auditors other than those of its own services, it shall draw its own conclusions regarding the financial consequences after examining the measures taken by the Member State concerned under Article 50(2), the notifications sent under Article 27(2), and any replies from the Member State. 4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 59 establishing the criteria for establishing the level of financial correction to be applied.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2 a (new)

The words ‘European Union aid’ accompanied by the emblem of the European Union shall be clearly marked on the packing of food and goods distributed under the operational programme as well as at the distribution points.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 5

5. The ~~managing~~competent authority shall inform beneficiaries of publication of the list of operations in accordance with paragraph 2. ~~The managing authority~~It shall provide information and publicity kits, including templates in electronic format, to help beneficiaries and partner organisations to meet their obligations as set out in paragraph 3.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53

Article 53 Procedure for financial corrections by the Commission 1. Before taking a decision on a financial correction, the Commission shall launch the procedure by informing the Member State of the provisional conclusions of its examination and requesting the Member State to submit its comments within two months. 2. Where the Commission proposes a financial correction on the basis of extrapolation or a flat rate, the Member State shall be given the opportunity to demonstrate, through an examination of the documentation concerned, that the actual extent of irregularity is less than the Commission's assessment. In agreement with the Commission, the Member State may limit the scope of this examination to an appropriate proportion or sample of the documentation concerned. Except in duly justified cases, the time allowed for this examination shall not exceed a further period of two months after the two-month period referred to in paragraph 1. 3. The Commission shall take account of any evidence supplied by the Member State within the time limits set out in paragraphs 1 and 2. 4. Where the Member State does not accept the provisional conclusions of the Commission, the Member State shall be invited to a hearing by the Commission, in order to ensure that all relevant information and observations are available as a basis for conclusions by the Commission on the application of the financial correction. 5. In order to apply financial corrections the Commission shall take a decision, by means of implementing acts, within six months of the date of the hearing, or of the date of receipt of additional information where the Member State agrees to submit such additional information following the hearing. The Commission shall take account of all information and observations submitted during the course of the procedure. If no hearing takes place, the six month period shall begin to run two months after the date of the letter of invitation to the hearing sent by the Commission. 6. Where irregularities affecting annual accounts sent to the Commission are detected by the Commission or by the European Court of Auditors, the resulting financial correction shall reduce support from the Fund to the operational programme.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 6

6. In processing personal data pursuant to this Article, the ~~managing~~competent authority as well as the beneficiaries and partner organisations shall abide by all confidential data protection rules so as to avoid any stigmatisation and comply with Directive 95/46/EC.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54

Article 54 Repayments to the Union Budget - Recoveries 1. Any repayment due to be made to the general budget of the Union shall be effected before the due date indicated in the order for recovery drawn up in accordance with Article 77 of the Financial Regulation. The due date shall be the last day of the second month following the issuing of the order. 2. Any delay in effecting repayment shall give rise to interest on account of late payment, starting on the due date and ending on the date of actual payment. The rate of such interest shall be one-and-a- half percentage points above the rate applied by the European Central Bank in its main refinancing operations on the first working day of the month in which the due date falls.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55

Article 55 Proportional control of operational programmes 1. Operations for which the total eligible expenditure does not exceed EUR 100 000 shall not be subject to more than one audit by either the audit authority or the Commission prior to the examination of all the expenditure concerned under Article 47. Other operations shall not be subject to more than one audit per accounting year by the audit authority and the Commission prior to the examination of all the expenditure concerned under Article 47. Those provisions are without prejudice to paragraphs 5 and 6. 2. Audit of an operation may cover all stages of its implementation and all levels of the distribution chain, with the exception of control of the actual end recipients, unless a risk assessment establishes a specific risk of irregularity or fraud. 3. When the most recent audit opinion on the operational programme indicates that there are no significant deficiencies, the Commission may agree with the audit authority in the subsequent meeting referred to in Article 34(2) that the level of audit work required may be reduced so that it is proportionate to the risk established. In such cases, the Commission will not carry out its own on- the-spot audits unless there is evidence suggesting deficiencies in the management and control system affecting expenditure declared to the Commission in an accounting year for which the accounts have been accepted. 4. If the Commission concludes that it can rely on the opinion of the audit authority for the operational programme, it may agree with the audit authority to limit its own on the spot audits to audit the work of the audit authority unless there is evidence of deficiencies in the work of the audit authority work for an accounting year for which the accounts have been accepted. 5. The audit authority and the Commission may carry out audits of operations at any time where a risk assessment establishes a specific risk of irregularity or fraud, in case of evidence of serious deficiencies in the management and control system of the operational programme, and, during the 3 years following acceptance of all the expenditure of an operation under Article 47, as part of an audit sample. 6. The Commission may at any time carry out audits of operations for the purpose of assessing the work of an audit authority by re-performance of its audit activity.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56

Article 56 Rules on decommitment 1. The Commission shall decommit any part of the amount calculated in accordance with the second subparagraph in an operational programme that has not been used for payment of the pre- financing, interim payments and annual balance by 31 December of the second financial year following the year of budget commitment under the operational programme or for which a payment application drawn up in accordance with Article 38 has not been sent in accordance with Article 42. For the purposes of the decommitment, the Commission shall calculate the amount by adding one sixth of the annual budget commitment related to the 2014 total annual contribution to each of the 2015 to 2020 budget commitments. 2. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph of paragraph 1, the deadlines for decommitment shall not apply to the annual budget commitment related to the 2014 total annual contribution. 3. If the first annual budget commitment is related to the 2015 total annual contribution, by way of derogation from paragraph 1, the deadlines for decommitment shall not apply to the annual budget commitment related to the total annual contribution of 2015. In such cases, the Commission shall calculate the amount under the first sub-paragraph of paragraph 1 by adding one fifth of the annual budget commitment related to the 2015 total amount contribution to each of the 2016 to 2020 budget commitments. 4. That part of commitments still open on 31 December 2022 shall be decommitted if any of the documents required under Article 47(2) has not been submitted to the Commission by 30 September 2023.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57

Article 57 Exception to the decommitment 1. The amount concerned by decommitment shall be reduced by the amounts that the responsible body has not been able to declare to the Commission because of: (uu) operations suspended by a legal proceeding or by an administrative appeal having suspensory effect; or (vv) reasons of force majeure seriously affecting implementation of all or part of the operational programme. The national authorities claiming force majeure shall demonstrate the direct consequences of the force majeure on the implementation of all or part of the operational programme; (ww) The reduction may be requested once if the suspension or force majeure lasted up to one year, or several times corresponding to the duration of the force majeure or the number of years between the date of the legal or administrative decision suspending the implementation of the operation and the date of the final legal or administrative decision. 2. By 31 January, the Member State shall send to the Commission information on the exceptions referred to in paragraph 1 for the amount to be declared by the end of the preceding year.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 2

2. Operations shall not be selected for support by the operational programme where they have been physically completed or fully implemented before the application for funding under the operational programme is submitted by the beneficiary to the ~~managing~~competent authority, irrespective of whether all related payments have been made by the beneficiary.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 58

Article 58 Procedure for decommitments 1. The Commission shall inform the Member State and the managing authority in good time whenever there is a risk of application of decommitment under Article 56. 2. On the basis of the information it has on 31 January, the Commission shall inform the Member State and the managing authority of the amount of the decommitment resulting from the information in its possession. 3. The Member State shall have two months to agree to the amount to be decommitted or to submit its observations. 4. By 30 June, the Member State shall submit to the Commission a revised financing plan reflecting for the financial year concerned the reduced amount of support of the operational programme. Failing such submission, the Commission shall revise the financing plan by reducing the contribution from the Fund for the financial year concerned. 5. The Commission shall amend the decision adopting the operational programme, by means of implementing act, no later than 30 September.deleted

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Dominique VLASTO, Philippe BOULLAND, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

The food and the goods for ~~homeless persons or for children~~the most deprived persons may be purchased by the partner organisations themselves.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 a (new)

Article 60a The Commission shall take the necessary financial and regulatory measures, if need be through budgetary redeployment, early pre-financing or prolongation of Regulation (EC) No 121/2012, in order to ensure the continuity of the MDP from 2013 to 2014 in the event of delays in the implementation of this regulation.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Agnès LE BRUN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1

This annex is deleted.

2013/03/01
Committee: AGRI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

They may also be purchased by a public body and made available free of charge to the partner organisations. In that case, the food may be obtained from the use, processing or sale of the products in intervention stocks made available in accordance with Article 15 of the Regulation (EU) No [CMO], provided that this is economically the most favourable option and does not unduly delay the delivery of the food products to the partner organisations. Any amount derived from a transaction concerning those stocks shall be used for the benefit of the most deprived persons, and shall not be applied so as to diminish the obligation of the Member States, provided in Article 18 of this Regulation, to co-finance the programme as a complement to the budget of the Fund..

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 4

4. That material assistance shall normally be distributed free of charge to the most deprived persons, or sold at a price no greater than 10% of the market price and under no circumstances exceeding a level justified by the distribution costs borne by the designated organisations.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) the costs of purchasing food and basic consumer goods for personal use of ~~homeless persons or of children~~the most deprived persons;

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) where a public body purchases the food or basic consumer goods for the personal use of ~~homeless persons or of children~~the most deprived and provides them to partner organisations, the costs of transporting of food or goods to the storage depots of the partner organisations at a flat rate of 1 % of the costs referred to in point (a);

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 24 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) the costs of social inclusion activities undertaken and declared by the partner organisations delivering directly or indirectly the material assistance to the most deprived persons at a flat rate of 5% of the costs referred to in point (a);

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26

Management and control systems shall provide for: (a) a description of the functions of each body concerned in management and control, and the allocation of functions within each body; (b) compliance with the principle of separation of functions between and within such bodies; (c) procedures for ensuring the correctness and regularity of expenditure declared; (d) computerised systems for accounting, for the storage and transmission of financial data and data on indicators, for monitoring and for reporting; (e) systems for reporting and monitoring where the responsible body entrusts execution of tasks to another body; (f) arrangements for auditing the functioning of the management and control systems; (g) systems and procedures to ensure an adequate audit trail; (h) the prevention, detection and correction of irregularities, including fraud, and the recovery of amounts unduly paid, together with any interest;deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 27

1. Member States shall fulfil the management, control and audit obligations and assume the resulting responsibilities laid down in the rules on shared management set out in the Financial Regulation and this Regulation. In accordance with the principle of shared management, Member States shall be responsible for the management and control of operational programmes. 2. Member States shall prevent, detect and correct irregularities and shall recover amounts unduly paid, together with any interest on late payments. They shall notify these irregularities to the Commission and shall keep the Commission informed of the progress of related administrative and legal proceedings. When amounts unduly paid to a beneficiary cannot be recovered and this is as a result of fault or negligence on the part of a Member State, the Member State shall be responsible for reimbursing the amounts concerned to the general budget of the Union. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 59 laying down detailed rules concerning the obligations of the Member States specified in this paragraph. 3. Member States shall establish and implement a procedure for the independent examination and resolution of complaints concerning the selection or implementation of operations co-financed by the Fund. Member States shall report the results of such examinations to the Commission upon request. 4. All official exchanges of information between the Member State and the Commission shall be carried out using an electronic data exchange system established in compliance with the terms and conditions laid down by the Commission by means of implementing acts. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 60(3).Article 27 deleted Responsibilities of Member States

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28

Designation and organisation of management and control bodies 1. The Member State shall designate a national public authority or body as managing authority. 2. The Member State shall designate a national public authority or body as a certifying authority, without prejudice to paragraph 3. 3. The Member State may designate a managing authority which carries out in addition the functions of the certifying authority. 4. The Member State shall designate a national public authority or body, functionally independent from the managing authority and the certifying authority, as audit authority. 5. Provided that the principle of separation of functions is respected, the managing authority, the certifying authority, where applicable, and the audit authority may be part of the same public authority or body. 6. The Member State may designate one or more intermediate bodies to carry out certain tasks of the managing or the certifying authority under the responsibility of that authority. The relevant arrangements between the managing authority or certifying authority and the intermediate bodies shall be formally recorded in writing. 7. The Member State or the managing authority may entrust the management of part of the operational programme to an intermediate body by way of an agreement in writing between the intermediate body and the Member State or managing authority. The intermediate body shall provide guarantees of its solvency and competence in the domain concerned, as well as its administrative and financial management. 8. The Member State shall lay down in writing rules governing its relations with the managing authority, certifying authority and audit authority, the relations between such authorities, and the relations of such authorities with the Commission.Article 28 deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 29

~~[...]~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30

~~[...]~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 31

~~[...]~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32

managing and the certifying authorities 1. Member states shall notify to the Commission the date and form of the designation of the managing authority and, where appropriate the certifying authority, within six months of the adoption of decision adopting the operational programme. 2. The designation referred to in paragraph 1 shall be based on a report and an opinion of an independent audit body that assesses the management and control system, including the role of intermediate bodies therein, and its compliance with Articles 26, 27, 29 and 30, in accordance with criteria on internal environment, control activities, information and communication, and monitoring established by the Commission by means of delegated act in accordance with Article 59. 3. The independent body shall carry out its work in accordance with internationally accepted audit standards. 4. Member States may decide that a managing authority or a certifying authority which has been designated in relation to an ESF co-financed operational programme pursuant to Regulation (EU) No [CPR] is deemed to be designated for the purposes of this Regulation. The Commission may request, within two months of receipt of the notification referred to in paragraph 1, the report and the opinion of the independent audit body and the description of the management and control system. The Commission may make observations within two months of receipt of those documents. 5. The Member State shall supervise the designated body and withdraw its designation by formal decision if one or more of the criteria referred to in paragraph 2 are no longer met, unless the body takes the necessary remedial actions within a period of probation to be determined by the Member State according to the severity of the problem. The Member State shall notify the Commission immediately of the setting of any probation period for a designated body and of any withdrawal decision.Article 32 deleted Procedure for designation of the

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33

~~[...]~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34

Cooperation with audit authority 1. The Commission shall cooperate with audit authorities to coordinate their audit plans and methods and shall immediately exchange the results of audits carried out on management and control systems. 2. The Commission and the audit authority shall meet on a regular basis and at least once a year, unless otherwise agreed, to examine the annual control report, the opinion and the audit strategy, and to exchange views on issues relating to improvement of the management and control systems.Article 34 deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 a (new)

Article 26a Member States shall carry out administrative and physical controls to ensure that operational programmes are implemented in compliance with the applicable rules and shall establish the penalties applicable in the event of irregularities.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 1

1. ~~Managing~~The competent authority shall ensure that, in the case of grants to partner organisations, beneficiaries are provided with a flow sufficient to ensure proper implementation of the operations.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 1

1. The c~~ertifying~~ompetent authority shall submit on a regular basis an application for interim payment covering amounts entered in its accounts as public support paid to beneficiaries in the accounting year ending 30 June.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 2

2. The c~~ertifying~~ompetent authority shall submit the final application for interim payment by 31 July following the end of the previous accounting year and, in any event, before the first application for interim payment for the next accounting year.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 42 – paragraph 3

3. The first application for interim payment shall not be made before the notification to the Commission of the designation of the ~~managing authority and the certifying authority in accordance to Article 32(1)~~competent authorities.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 43

Interruption of the time limit payment 1. The time limit for the payment of an interim payment claim may be interrupted by the authorising officer by delegation within the meaning of the Financial Regulation for a maximum period of nine months when the following conditions are met: (a) on the basis of the information provided by a national or Union audit body, there is evidence to suggest a significant deficiency in the functioning of the management and control system; (b) the authorising officer by delegation has to carry out additional verifications following information coming to his attention alerting him that expenditure in a request for payment is linked to an irregularity having serious financial consequences; (c) there is a failure to submit one of the documents required under Article 45(1). 2. The authorising officer by delegation may limit the interruption to the part of the expenditure covered by the payment claim affected by the elements referred to in paragraph 1. The authorising officer by delegation shall inform the Member State and the managing authority immediately of the reason for interruption and shall ask them to remedy the situation. The interruption shall be ended by the authorising officer by delegation as soon as the necessary measures have been taken.Article 43 deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 44

1. All or part of the interim payments may be suspended by the Commission where: (a) there is a serious deficiency in the management and control system of the operational programme for which corrective measures have not been taken; (b) expenditure in a statement of expenditure is linked to an irregularity having serious financial consequences which has not been corrected; (c) the Member State has failed to take the necessary action to remedy the situation giving rise to an interruption under Article 43; (d) there is a serious deficiency in the quality and reliability of the monitoring system or of the data on indicators. 2. The Commission may decide, by means of implementing acts, to suspend all or part of interim payments, after having given the Member State the opportunity to present its observations. 3. The Commission shall end suspension of all or part of interim payments where the Member State has taken the necessary measures to enable the suspension to be lifted.Article 44 deleted Suspension of payments

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) (hh) the total amount of eligible expenditure entered into the accounts of the c~~ertifying~~ompetent authority as having been incurred and paid by beneficiaries in implementing operations, the total amount of public eligible expenditure incurred in implementing operations and the corresponding eligible public contribution which has been paid to beneficiaries;

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 46 – paragraph 2

2. The c~~ertifying~~ompetent authority may specify in the accounts a provision, which shall not exceed 5 % of the total expenditure in payment applications presented for a given accounting year, where the assessment of the legality and regularity of the expenditure is subject to an on-going procedure with the audit authority. The amount covered shall be excluded from the total amount of eligible expenditure referred to in paragraph 1(a). These amounts shall be definitively included in, or excluded from, the annual accounts of the following year.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 48

1. The managing authority shall ensure that all supporting documents on operations are made available to the Commission and the European Court of Auditors upon request for a period of three years. This three year period shall run from 31 December of the year of the decision on acceptance of accounts by the Commission pursuant to Article 47 or, at the latest, from the date of payment of the final balance. This three year period shall be interrupted either in the case of legal or administrative proceedings or by a duly justified request of the Commission. 2. The documents shall be kept either in the form of the originals, or certified true copies of the originals, or on commonly accepted data carriers including electronic versions of original documents or documents existing in electronic version only. 3. The documents shall be kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the data were collected or for which they are further processed. 4. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 59 to set out which data carriers can be considered as commonly accepted. 5. The procedure for certification of conformity of documents held on commonly accepted data carriers with the original document shall be laid down by the national authorities and shall ensure that the versions held comply with national legal requirements and can be relied on for audit purposes. 6. Where documents exist in electronic version only, the computer systems used must meet accepted security standards that ensure that the documents held comply with national legal requirements and can be relied on for audit purposes.Article 48 deleted Availability of documents

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 2

2. The Member State shall make the financial corrections required in connection with individual or systemic irregularities detected in operations or the operational programme. Financial corrections shall consist of cancelling all or part of the public contribution to an operation or the operational programme. The Member State shall take into account the nature and gravity of the irregularities and the financial loss to the Fund and shall apply a proportionate correction. Financial corrections shall be recorded in the annual accounts by the managing authority for the accounting year in which the cancellation is deciddeleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 3

~~3. The contribution from the Fund cancelled in accordance with paragraph 2 may be reused by the Member State within the operational programme concerned, subject to paragraph 4.~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 4

4. The contribution cancelled in accordance with paragraph 2 may not be reused for any operation that was the subject of the correction or, where a financial correction is made for a systemic irregularity, for any operation affected by the systemic irregularity.deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 50 – paragraph 5

~~5. A financial correction by the Commission shall not prejudice the Member State's obligation to pursue recoveries under the present Article.~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 51

Financial corrections by the Commission 1. The Commission shall make financial corrections, by means of implementing act, by cancelling all or part of the Union contribution to an operational programme and effecting recovery from the Member State in order to exclude from Union financing expenditure which is in breach of applicable Union and national law, including in relation to deficiencies in the management and control systems of Member States which have been detected by the Commission or the European Court of Auditors. 2. A breach of applicable Union or national law shall lead to a financial correction only when one of the following conditions is met: (a) the breach has or could have affected the selection of an operation by the managing authority for support by the Fund; (b) the breach has or could have affected the amount of expenditure declared for reimbursement by the Union budget.Article 51 deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 52

~~[...]~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 53

Procedure for financial corrections by the 1. Before taking a decision on a financial correction, the Commission shall launch the procedure by informing the Member State of the provisional conclusions of its examination and requesting the Member State to submit its comments within two months. 2. Where the Commission proposes a financial correction on the basis of extrapolation or a flat rate, the Member State shall be given the opportunity to demonstrate, through an examination of the documentation concerned, that the actual extent of irregularity is less than the Commission's assessment. In agreement with the Commission, the Member State may limit the scope of this examination to an appropriate proportion or sample of the documentation concerned. Except in duly justified cases, the time allowed for this examination shall not exceed a further period of two months after the two-month period referred to in paragraph 1. 3. The Commission shall take account of any evidence supplied by the Member State within the time limits set out in paragraphs 1 and 2. 4. Where the Member State does not accept the provisional conclusions of the Commission, the Member State shall be invited to a hearing by the Commission, in order to ensure that all relevant information and observations are available as a basis for conclusions by the Commission on the application of the financial correction. 5. In order to apply financial corrections the Commission shall take a decision, by means of implementing acts, within six months of the date of the hearing, or of the date of receipt of additional information where the Member State agrees to submit such additional information following the hearing. The Commission shall take account of all information and observations submitted during the course of the procedure. If no hearing takes place, the six month period shall begin to run two months after the date of the letter of invitation to the hearing sent by the Commission. 6. Where irregularities affecting annual accounts sent to the Commission are detected by the Commission or by the European Court of Auditors, the resulting financial correction shall reduce support from the Fund to the operational programme.Article 53 deleted Commission

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 54

Repayments to the Union Budget - 1. Any repayment due to be made to the general budget of the Union shall be effected before the due date indicated in the order for recovery drawn up in accordance with Article 77 of the Financial Regulation. The due date shall be the last day of the second month following the issuing of the order. 2. Any delay in effecting repayment shall giArticle 54 deleted Recove riese to interest on account of late payment, starting on the due date and ending on the date of actual payment. The rate of such interest shall be one-and-a- half percentage points above the rate applied by the European Central Bank in its main refinancing operations on the first working day of the month in which the due date falls.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 55

~~[...]~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56

1. The Commission shall decommit any part of the amount calculated in accordance with the second subparagraph in an operational programme that has not been used for payment of the pre- financing, interim payments and annual balance by 31 December of the second financial year following the year of budget commitment under the operational programme or for which a payment application drawn up in accordance with Article 38 has not been sent in accordance with Article 42. For the purposes of the decommitment, the Commission shall calculate the amount by adding one sixth of the annual budget commitment related to the 2014 total annual contribution to each of the 2015 to 2020 budget commitments. 2. By way of derogation from the first subparagraph of paragraph 1, the deadlines for decommitment shall not apply to the annual budget commitment related to the 2014 total annual contribution. 3. If the first annual budget commitment is related to the 2015 total annual contribution, by way of derogation from paragraph 1, the deadlines for decommitment shall not apply to the annual budget commitment related to the total annual contribution of 2015. In such cases, the Commission shall calculate the amount under the first sub-paragraph of paragraph 1 by adding one fifth of the annual budget commitment related to the 2015 total amount contribution to each of the 2016 to 2020 budget commitments. 4. That part of commitments still open on 31 December 2022 shall be decommitted if any of the documents required under Article 47(2) has not been submitted to the Commission by 30 September 2023.Article 56 deleted Rules on decommitment

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 57

Article 57 Exception to the decommitment 1. The amount concerned by decommitment shall be reduced by the amounts that the responsible body has not been able to declare to the Commission because of: (a) operations suspended by a legal proceeding or by an administrative appeal having suspensory effect; (b) reasons of force majeure seriously affecting implementation of all or part of the operational programme. The national authorities claiming force majeure shall demonstrate the direct consequences of the force majeure on the implementation of all or part of the operational programme; (c) The reduction may be requested once if the suspension or force majeure lasted up to one year, or several times corresponding to the duration of the force majeure or the number of years between the date of the legal or administrative decision suspending the implementation of the operation and the date of the final legal or administrative decision. 2. By 31 January, the Member State shall send to the Commission information on the exceptions referred to in paragraph 1 for the amount to be declared by the end of the preceding year.deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 58

Procedure for decommitments 1. The Commission shall inform the Member State and the managing authority in good time whenever there is a risk of application of decommitment under Article 56. 2. On the basis of the information it has on 31 January, the Commission shall inform the Member State and the managing authority of the amount of the decommitment resulting from the information in its possession. 3. The Member State shall have two months to agree to the amount to be decommitted or to submit its observations. 4. By 30 June, the Member State shall submit to the Commission a revised financing plan reflecting for the financial year concerned the reduced amount of support of the operational programme. Failing such submission, the Commission shall revise the financing plan by reducing the contribution from the Fund for the financial year concerned. 5. The Commission shall amend the decision adopting the operational programme, by means of implementing act, no later than 30 September.Article 58 deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 60 a (new)

Article 60a Transitional rules The Commission shall take the necessary financial and regulatory measures, if need be by budgetary redeployment, early pre-financing or extension of Regulation (EC) No 121/2012, in order to ensure the continuity of the MDP from 2013 to 2014 in the event of delays in the implementation of this regulation.

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0295(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1

~~[...]~~deleted

2013/02/26
Committee: REGI

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 2

(2) The Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a European agenda for culture in a globalizing world, endorsed by the Council in the Resolution of 16 November 2007 on a European Agenda for Culture, sets the objectives for future activities of the Union in the field of culture. These activities should promote cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue. They should also promote culture as a catalyst for creativity within the framework of growth and jobs and as a social bridge-builder, as well as a vital element in the Union'’s international relations.

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 5

(5) In addition to the original objectives of the European Capitals of Culture, which were to highlight the richness and diversity of European cultures and the features they share and to promote greater mutual understanding between European citizens, cities holding the title have also progressively added a new dimension by using the leverage effect of the title to stimulate the city’s more general development, not least where urban development is concerned.

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 7

(7) The evaluations and the public consultation have demonstrated that the European Capitals of Culture have many potential benefits when they are planned with consideration. They remain first and foremost a cultural initiative, but they can also ~~have~~bring significant social and economic benefits, particularly when they are embedded ~~as part of~~within a long-term ~~culture led~~overall development strategy in the city, focusing on cultural development in particular.

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Recital 12

(12) The selection criteria should be more explicit in order to give more guidance to the candidate cities on the aims and requirements implied in the title of European Capital of Culture and more measurable in order to help the panel of experts in the selection and monitoring of cities. They should in particular reinforce the legacy of the title by rewarding cities which have developed a long-term cultural policy strategy.

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) the plans to strengthen the capacity of ~~the~~ cultural sectors;

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point c

(c) the plans to strengthen the long -term links between ~~the~~ cultural sectors and the economic and social sectors in the city;

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 2 – point b

(~~b) the city has or will have adequate and viable infrastructure to host the title;~~Does not affect English version.)

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – point a

(a) a clear and coherent artistic vision and strategy for the cultural programme of the year;

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 3 – point c

(c) the range, prestige, and diversity of the activities proposed and their overall artistic quality;

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – point a

(a) the scope, impact, and quality of activities promoting the cultural diversity of Europe;

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – point b

(b) the scope, impact, and quality of activities highlighting the common aspects of European cultures, heritage and history, as well as European integration;

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 4 – point c

(c) the scope, impact, and quality of activities featuring European artists, co-operation with operators or cities in different countries, and transnational partnerships;

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 5 – paragraph 6 – point -a (new)

(-a) partnership with public and private local, regional, and national stakeholders;

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0199(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 12 – paragraph 1

1. After their designation, the European Capitals of Culture of the same year ~~shall seek to~~must develop links between their cultural programmes.

2013/04/22
Committee: CULT

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe JUVIN, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Agnès LE BRUN

Proposal for a regulation
Title 1

Proposal for a ~~REGULATION~~DIRECTIVE OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL on periodic roadworthiness tests for motor vehicles and their trailers and repealing Directive 2009/40/EC (Text with EEA relevance)

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 7

(7) Solid investigation results show that 8% of the accidents involving motorcycles are caused or linked to technical defects. Motorcycle riders are the group of road users with the highest safety risk, with rising trend in the number of fatalities. Moped drivers are overrepresented in the number of fatalities, with more than 1,400 drivers killed on the roads in 2008. The scope of vehicles to be tested shall therefore be extended to the highest risk group of road users, the powered two- or three-wheel vehicles.deleted

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 25

(25) Roadworthiness testing is part of a wider regulatory scheme, governing vehicles throughout their lifetime from approval via registrations, inspections until scrapping. The development and interconnection of national and manufacturers'’ electronic vehicle databases shwould ~~in principle~~ contribute to improve the efficiency of the whole vehicle administrative chain and reduce costs and administrative burdens. ~~The Commission should therefore carry out a study on the feasibility, costs and benefits of setting-up a European electronic vehicle information platform for this purpose.~~

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 29

(29) Since the objective of this Regulation, namely to lay down minimum common requirements and harmonised rules concerning the conduct of roadworthiness tests of vehicles within the Union, cannot be sufficiently achieved by the Member States and can therefore be better achieved at Union level, the Union may adopt measures, in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity as set out in Article 5 of the Treaty. In accordance with the principle of proportionality, as set out in that Article, this Regulation does not go beyond what is necessary in order to achieve that objective.deleted

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – indent 5

– trailers and semi-trailers with a maximum permissible mass not exceeding 3 500 kg – vehicle categor~~ies O1 and~~y O2,

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe JUVIN, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Agnès LE BRUN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – indent 7

~~– two- or three-wheel vehicles – vehicle categories L1e, L2e, L3e, L4e, L5e, L6e and L7e,~~deleted

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe JUVIN, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Agnès LE BRUN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 5

~~(5) ‘two- or three-wheel vehicles’ means any power-driven vehicle on two wheels with or without sidecar, tricycles and quadricycles;~~deleted

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – indent 3

– It has not sustained any substantial change in the technical characteristics of its main components such as engine, brakes, steering or suspension and

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – indent 4

~~– It has not been changed in its appearance;~~deleted

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – indent 4 a (new)

– The model is no longer in production;

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 9

(9) ‘roadworthiness test’ means a ~~verification that the parts and components of a vehicle comply with its safety and environmental characteristics in force at~~ n inspection to ensure that a vehicle is safe to be used on public roads and complies withe t~~ime of approval, first registration or entry into service, as well as at the time of retrofitting~~he relevant environmental requirements;

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3

3. Vehicle manufacturers shall provide the testing centres or, when relevant, the competent authority, with access to the technical information necessary for roadworthiness testing, ~~as set out in Annex I. The Commission shall adopt~~with due regard for the provisions on access to information laid down in Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 and Regulation (EC) No 595/2009. Prior to the entry into force of this text, the Commission shall adopt, by means of implementing acts, the technical information necessary for roadworthiness testing, in accordance with Annex II, point 3, as well as detailed rules concerning the procedures on access to the relevant technical information ~~set out in Annex I~~, in accordance with the examination procedure referred to in Article 16(2).

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe JUVIN, Brice HORTEFEUX, Arnaud DANJEAN, Agnès LE BRUN

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 1

~~– Vehicles of categories L1e, L2e, L3e, L4e, L5e, L6e and L7e: four years after the date on which the vehicle was first registered, then two years and thereafter annually;~~deleted

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Philippe JUVIN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – indent 2

– Vehicles of category M1, N1 and O2: four years after the date on which the vehicle was first registered~~, then~~ and every two years ~~and~~ thereafter ~~annually~~;

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – indent 3

– dangerous deficiencies that constitute a direct and immediate risk to road safety such that the ~~vehicle may not be~~Member State or its national authorities may prohibit used onf the ~~road under any circumstances~~vehicle on the road.

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 3

3. In the case of dangerous deficiencies, the Member State or competent authority may decide that the vehicle shall not be used on publicly accessible roads and ~~its registration shall be~~ withdrawn i~~n accordance with Article 3a of Directive XXX of the European Parliament and of the Council amending Council Directive 1999/37/EC on the registration documents for vehicles24~~ts licence without the need for fresh proceedings until the deficiencies are rectified and a new roadworthiness certificate is issued testifying that the vehicle is in a roadworthy condition.

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 4 a (new)

(4a) The legal person which carried out repairs or maintenance work on the vehicle may not be involved in subsequent periodic inspections to test its roadworthiness.

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – title

ENational electronic vehicle information ~~platform~~networking

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1

The Commission shall examine the ~~feasibility, costs and benefits of the establishment of an electronic~~most efficient means of networking existing national vehicle information ~~platform~~systems with a view to facilitating the exchange of information on data related to roadworthiness testing and mileage between the competent national authoritie~~s of Member States responsible for testing, registration and vehicle approval, the testing centres and the vehicle manufacturer~~s.

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0184(COD)

Michel DANTIN, Dominique RIQUET, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1

~~[...]~~deleted

2013/03/28
Committee: TRAN

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 9

(9) Having the freedom to provide and to receive collective management services across national borders entails that rightholders are able to freely choose the collecting society for the management of their rights, such as public performance or broadcasting rights, or categories of rights, such as interactive communication to the public, provided the collecting society already manages such rights or categories of rights. This implies that rightholders can easily withdraw their rights or categories of rights from a collecting society and entrust or transfer all or part of them to another collecting society or another entity irrespective of the Member State of residence or the nationality of either the collecting society or the rightholder. Collecting societies managing different types of works and other subject matter, such as literary, musical or photographic works, should also allow this flexibility to rightholders as regards the management of different types of works and other subject matter. Collecti~~ng societie~~ve management organisations should inform rightholders of this choice and allow them to exercise it as easily as possible. Finally, this Directive should not prejudice the possibilities of rightholders to manage their rights individually, including for non- commercial uses. Direct copyright management arrangements between users and rightholders, which are of prime importance in sectors other than the music industry, including the audiovisual and publishing sectors, help to prevent a fragmentation of rights and facilitate the rise of new online services.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 20 a (new)

(20a) This Directive is without prejudice to arrangements in the Member States concerning the management of rights, such as extended collective licensing, compulsory collective management, or legal presumptions of representation or transfer, provided that the arrangements in question are compatible with Union law and the international obligations of the European Union and the Member States. In the case of compulsory collective management for all works in a given category of rights or types of content, the requirement to publish the repertoire shall not apply where a single compulsory collective management body is specifically mandated.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 24

(24) ~~In the online music~~Unlike the other creative sectors, where direct licensing plays a greater role, collective management of authors’ rights on a territorial basis remains the norm, i~~t is~~n the online music sector. It is therefore essential to create conditions conducive to the most effective licensing practices by collecting societies~~, in an increasingly cross-border context~~. It is therefore appropriate to provide for a set of rules coordinating basic conditions for the provision by collecting societies of multi- territorial collective licensing of authors’ online rights in musical works. These provisions should ensure the necessary minimum quality of the cross-border services provided by collecting societies, notably in terms of transparency of repertoire represented and accuracy of financial flows related to the use of the rights. They should also set out a framework for facilitating the voluntary aggregation of music repertoire and thus reducing the number of licences a user needs to operate a multi-territorial service. These provisions should enable a collecting society to request another collecting society to represent its repertoire on a multi-territorial basis where it cannot fulfil the requirements itself. There should be an obligation on the requested society, provided that it aggregates repertoire and offers or grants multi-territorial licences, to accept the mandate of the requesting society. The development of legal online music services across the Union should also contribute to the fight against piracy.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Recital 43

(43) The provisions of this Directive are without prejudice to the application of competition law rules, and any other relevant law in other areas including confidentiality, respecting in particular individual non-disclosure agreements and non-disclosure clauses, trade secrets, privacy, access to documents, the law of contract and private international law relating to the conflict of laws and the jurisdiction of courts.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1

Titles I, II, IV and IV with the exception of Articles 36 and 40 shall apply to all collecting societies established in the Union.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 a (new)

Articles 13 to 20 shall apply to collecting societies operating in at least one EU Member State.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 2 – paragraph 1 b (new)

Chapter 5 ‘Transparency and Reporting’ in Title II shall apply to all entities actively engaged in the management of rights in at least one EU Member State.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point c

~~c) the general investment policy, including on granting loans or providing security or guarantee for loans, with regard to rights revenue;~~deleted

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 5 – point d

d~~) the rules on deductions from rights revenue.~~eleted

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8

~~8. Every member of a collecting society shall have the right to appoint any other natural or legal person as a proxy holder to attend and vote at the general meeting in his name.~~deleted

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8 a (new)

8 a. The collecting society shall provide its members, where they are unable to attend the general meeting in person, with the means to exercise their right to vote: appointment of a proxy or distance voting.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 7 – paragraph 8 b (new)

8 b. Where the collecting society gives members the right to appoint a person as proxy to attend and vote at the general meeting on their behalf, the society may limit this right to other members in the same category.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 1

1. Member States shall ensure that agreements governing the relationship of the collecting society with its members ~~and rightholders shall specify~~shall specify the rules governing the calculation of the deductions applicable to the rights revenue referred to in point (e) of Article 16.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

2. Member States shall ensure that, where a collecting society provides social, cultural or educational services funded through deductions from rights revenue, ~~rightholders~~the members of the collecting society are entitled to the following services:

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point a

a) ~~social, cultural or educational services~~ on the basis of fair criteria, in particular in relation to the access to and the extent of those services;

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point b

b) rightholders who have terminated the authorisation to manage rights or categories of rights or types of works and other subject matter or who have withdrawn their rights or categories of rights or types of works and other subject matter from the collecting society, continue to have access to those services. The criteria in relation to the access to and the extent of those services may take into consideration the rights revenue generated by those rightholders and the duration of the authorisation to manage rights, provided that such criteria are also applicable to rightholders who have not terminated such authorisation or have not withdrawn their rights or categories of rights or types of works and other subject matter from the collecting society.deleted

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 2

2. Where the amounts due to rightholders cannot be distributed, after ~~fiv~~a period laid down in the statute of the collecting society or by the general meeting and which may not be less than three years from the end of the financial year in which the collection of the rights revenue occurred, and provided that the collecting society has taken all necessary measures to identify and locate the rightholders, the collecting society shall decide on the use of the amounts concerned in accordance with Article 7(5)(b) and the applicable law, without prejudice to the right of the rightholder to claim such amounts from the collecting society during the period laid down by the applicable law.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 12 – paragraph 3

3. For the purposes of paragraph 2, measures to identify and locate rightholders shall include verifying membership records and making available to the members of the collecting society ~~as well as to the public~~who are rightholders and to the other collecting societies a list of works and other subject matter for which one or more rightholders have not been identified or located.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point b

b) the rights revenue collected on behalf of the rightholder once the collecting society determined the amount involved;

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 16 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

ba) the members of a collecting society must forward to the latter, within a reasonable period, detailed information concerning the possible uses of the work, with a view to facilitating the smooth running of the society;

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

The information referred to in paragraph 1 shall be made available to the publi~~shed~~c on the website of the collecting society ~~and shall remain available to the public on that website~~.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0180(COD)

Proposal for a directive
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

Member States shall ensure that, irrespective of its legal form under national law, a collecting society draws up and make public an annual transparency report, including a special report, for each financial year no later than six months following the end of the financial year. The annual transparency report shall be signed by all directors designated by the administrative board of the organisation.

2013/05/18
Committee: CULT

2012/0022(APP)

Draft opinion
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas, however, a proportion of the staff of foundations are volunteers who are not paid for their time;

2013/03/28
Committee: CULT

2012/0022(APP)

Draft opinion
Recommendation iii a (new)

(iiia) recalls the proposals in the 2011 report on the European Year of Volunteering and urges the Commission to consider these proposals in concrete terms;

2013/03/28
Committee: CULT

2012/0022(APP)

Draft opinion
Recommendation v – indent 1

~~– the figure of EUR 25 000 as the minimum level of assets be increas~~deleted;

2013/03/28
Committee: CULT

2012/0022(APP)

Draft opinion
Recommendation v - indent 7 a (new)

– the requirement, in the event of winding up, to donate the assets to foundations or organisations with the same characteristics;

2013/03/28
Committee: CULT

2011/2310(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 7 a (new)

– having regard to its resolution of 23 June 2011 on Objective 3: future agenda for cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation1, __________________ Texts adopted, P7_TA(2011)0285.

2012/05/24
Committee: REGI

2011/2310(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Calls also for due account to be taken of the action plan for the macro- regional strategy for the Atlantic region during the design and implementation of future territorial cooperation programmes;

2012/05/24
Committee: REGI

2011/2293(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Calls on the Member States to assess the need for a clear legal framework for volunteers and to draw up national strategies to promote the growth of volunteering activities, particularly in terms of adequate access to health and social protection;

2012/03/14
Committee: CULT

2011/2293(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Encourages the Member States to adopt the volunteering measurement method developed by the John Hopkins University and approved by the International Labour Organisation with a view to making available comparable statistics to gather information on cross-border volunteering in the EU and providing a clear picture of the significant contribution made by voluntary work;

2012/03/14
Committee: CULT

2011/2293(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Urges the Member States to develop mechanisms for validating non-formal and formal learning outcomes, which will improve the value and transferability of the skills acquired outside formal education, facilitating in particular the acquisition of additional ECTS credits at university thanks to volunteering and by including a standardised mechanism of recognition for the skills acquired through volunteering in the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS);

2012/03/14
Committee: CULT

2011/2293(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15b. Calls on these authorities in particular to communicate existing European programmes to the actors and partners involved in volunteering, especially those with the ‘European territorial cooperation’ objectives of the cohesion policy and to facilitate access to them so that they can take advantage of them more effectively for their projects and cross-border activities;

2012/03/14
Committee: CULT

2011/2293(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Calls on the Commission, in particular, to ensure that volunteering projects are included in all new funding programmes and suggests setting up a unit dedicated to volunteering in the Commission to maintain, develop and encourage efficient inter-service and inter-institutional coordination in order to promote the role of voluntary activities in all EU sectoral policies;

2012/03/14
Committee: CULT

2011/2293(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17 a (new)

17b. calls on the European Commission to propose a European Statute for Associations to reduce the administrative costs related to cross-border activities and to simplify taxation for contributors, thereby promoting the establishment of voluntary structures on a European level which encourage mobility by making volunteering a truly European activity;

2012/03/14
Committee: CULT

2011/2293(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

Recommends that the Commission maintain the useful contact points set up both with ‘EYV 2011 Alliance’, which includes many civil society volunteering and networking organisations, and with the national coordinating bodies, strategic partners and spokesmen of the national governments in this sector, given the large variety of bodies responsible for volunteering in the EU; stresses the importance of contact networks and the exchange of good practices to distribute information about existing EU procedures which can help and support cross-border volunteering;

2012/03/14
Committee: CULT

2011/2290(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Emphasises in particular the importance of synergies between the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF), the European Neighbouring Partnership Instrument (ENPI) and the European Fisheries Fund (EFF) for planning in coastal areas; believes that macro-regional strategies, European Territorial Cooperation programmes and sea basin programmes are relevant tools for implementing integrated development strategies for the EU coastal territories.

2012/03/29
Committee: REGI

2011/2288(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Highlights that the EU’s cohesion policy makes an important contribution to the European economy ~~and~~, is the Community’s largest source of investment in the real economy and offers remarkable leverage for public and private investments, including at regional and local level;

2012/03/29
Committee: REGI

2011/2288(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that in most European countries, SMEs, along with large firms, generate a substantive part of the business sector value added, and ~~insi~~suggests that for geographically targeted support, the size of the enterprise should not ~~matter as the only~~be the only criterion as the most relevant criterion should be the quality and required sustainability of the project;

2012/03/29
Committee: REGI

2011/2288(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Believes that in the world of global competition, an option of cohesion policy support provides added value for European companies ~~when deciding in which world region to develop their operation capacities and where to transfer their knowhow~~by increasing their competitiveness and promoting the idea of investment in the EU territories; considers that the structural funds must contribute to the implementation of a truly sustainable industrial policy for the globalisation era and promote, in particular, the emergence of major European champions who set global benchmarks;

2012/03/29
Committee: REGI

2011/2288(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Endorses the economic rationale of a ~~place-~~n economic, social and territorial cohesion- based development policy rooted in the ~~fundamental~~ logic that the ~~inte~~progrests of the Union’s less- developed regions ~~is likely to increase, should they be able to offer~~will benefit the whole of the EU, especially because this policy will enable the competitive comparative advantages ~~as well as firm sets of incentives~~of these regions to be developed; in this context requests the Commission to support Member States and regions to pursue their own investment incentives policies;

2012/03/29
Committee: REGI

2011/2288(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Underlines that ~~high taxes and~~ public debt ~~are among~~is one of the key concerns identified by companies investing in Europe; would be particularly concerned by any effort to harmonise corporation tax conditions inevitably giving rise to higher fiscal burden in some Member States, and would deny individual regions to remain fiscally competitivecalls on the Commission and the Member States, in the context of the European Semester and European economic governance, to reflect and develop efforts in order to achieve a relative convergence of the different tax systems throughout the EU, thus enabling better economic integration and a deepening of the internal market conducive to increased investment;

2012/03/29
Committee: REGI

2011/2288(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Emphasises that the EU has an enormous strength in its cities, and that major urban infrastructure projects, and innovative business parks, provide ~~the strongest appeal~~one of the attractions for investment in the EU; urges the Member States to provide ~~large-scale~~ investments infor infrastructure and technology in order to enhance the liveability and competitiveness of Europe’s cities, while ensuring that these investments are not detrimental to real territorial cohesion and balanced rural development.

2012/03/29
Committee: REGI

2011/2246(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Strongly emphasises the educational and cultural role of the public media in promoting the European values of respect for freedom of expression and citizens’ rights; suggests that the commercial activities of the public media should solely complement the promotion of culture and their educational mission;

2012/04/13
Committee: CULT

2011/2246(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Notes the dynamic changes in the media world that are redefining the arena of information exchange; draws attention to the fact that the development of the Internet is opening possibilities for unrestricted, individual expression by citizens of EU Member States and other countries; calls on the Commission to propose measures to combat incitement– on the Internet and in the media–to hatred, violence, terrorism or threatening the physical integrity of individuals;

2012/04/13
Committee: CULT

2011/2246(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to maintain a balance between protecting copyright and prosecuting piracy and the ~~freedom to share~~demands of freedom of expression and access to information online; stresses that control of the media and individual Internet users is only possible in connection with violations of the Member States’ laws, and cannot be a means of censorship and restricting freedom of speech.

2012/04/13
Committee: CULT

2011/2196(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Considers it particularly important to employ intermodal solutions where possible; takes the view that r~~ail links between~~egional airports should be ~~developed, as they offer an ideal way of~~incorporated into national and European transport networks, in particular rail networks, in order to help eas~~ing~~e the capacity problems of the airports concerned;

2011/12/21
Committee: REGI

2011/2196(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the Member States and regional and local authorities to ensure that, in accordance with a specific territorial assessment, airports are included in regional spatial development plans orand taken into account in regional development strategies.;

2011/12/21
Committee: REGI

2011/2196(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Points out the importance of drawing up, planning and implementing joint cross-border strategies relating to development and access to airport infrastructure; highlights the importance of European territorial cooperation in achieving these coordinated strategies, and the urgency of certain cross-border investments; calls for all macro-regional coordination to include an in-depth study of transport integration – in particular as regards air transport – as part of its strategy, in order to achieve genuine social and territorial cohesion.

2011/12/21
Committee: REGI

2011/2180(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Stresses that the Erasmus programme has already been successful in promoting student mobility, but believes that further efforts should be made to raise awareness of the programme among students and educational establishments in order to ensure that it is effective, and that consideration should be given to stepping up funding for the programme;

2011/10/28
Committee: IMCO

2011/2180(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines that employability measures, such as lifelong learning, and the development of a broader range of skills suitable for the labour market must be a top priority in order to achieve sustainable growth and prosperity goals; Strongly supports university exchanges, the University-Business dialogue, apprenticeships and the skills passport in this regard;

2011/10/28
Committee: IMCO

2011/2180(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Andreas SCHWAB

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Highlights the contribution of the 7th EU Framework for Research, the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework programme and the European Research Area in facilitating the mobility of EU researchers and unleashing the innovation and competitiveness potential of the EU, and calls for closer links to be established between the European Higher Education Area and the European Research Area;

2011/10/28
Committee: IMCO

2011/2180(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Andreas SCHWAB

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Calls on the Commission to support and assist Member States throughout the intergovernmental process in light of the forthcoming conference of Ministers responsible for higher education in Bucharest in April 2012; endorses the approach set out in the recent Commission communication entitled ‘Supporting growth and jobs – an agenda for the modernisation of Europe's higher education systems’1; 1 Commission communication of 20 September 2011 to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on ‘Supporting growth and jobs – an agenda for the modernisation of Europe's higher education systems’ (COM(2011)0567).

2011/10/28
Committee: IMCO

2011/2180(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Andreas SCHWAB

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Draws attention to the strong link between the Bologna process and the Professional Qualifications Directive; Calls on the Commission, while respecting its boundaries of competence, to evaluate the uneven implementation of the process and to draw up a scoreboard in order for the Bologna process to become a real instrument for facilitating mobility of professionals not only between Member States but also between the EU and third country signatories; calls for a comparison to be made of minimum training requirements during the review of the Professional Qualifications Directive and for discussions to be held on a more regular basis between Member States, competent authorities and professional associations and organisations with a view to harmonising minimum training requirements and thereby moving towards a genuine European Higher Education Area;

2011/10/28
Committee: IMCO

2011/2180(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Andreas SCHWAB

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on the Commission to support Member States in enhancing the European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) in order to increase transparency so that it can be used as a comparative tool to facilitate the recognition of professional qualifications; calls for discussions to be held on the possibility of including traineeships carried out during higher- education courses in the ECTS;

2011/10/28
Committee: IMCO

2011/2180(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Andreas SCHWAB

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for improved networking and communication between EU universities in order to speed up the recognition of new diplomas, as well as for better provision of information to young people on the range of EU programmes open to them.

2011/10/28
Committee: IMCO

2011/2179(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. ~~Recognise~~Considers that macro-regions, as catchment areas bound by a common history, geography and culture, are an appropriate reference framework for the setting of strategic priorities for the coordination of programmes and European financing in a functional geographical area;

2012/01/31
Committee: CULT

2011/2179(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Considers that a macro-regional strategy in the Mediterranean must coordinate existing EU funds, particularly neighbourhood policy, cohesion policy and territorial cooperation funds to implement projects aimed at confronting common challenges such as the protection and enhancement of Euro-Mediterranean cultural heritage; recalls the importance of a coordinated and balanced neighbourhood policy for the South and the eligibility of cultural projects financed by ERDF to address these challenges;

2012/01/31
Committee: CULT

2011/2179(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that macro-regions provide an environment conducive to the involvement of local political stakeholders and non- governmental stakeholders, as these regions foster the development of effective coordination systems which facilitate bottom-up approaches with a view to ensuring the meaningful involvement of civil society in policy making and pooling existing initiatives in order to optimise resources and bring together the actors involved;

2012/01/31
Committee: CULT

2011/2179(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises the importance of the Mediterranean as a decentralised area of cooperation in strengthening cross-regional policy and the sharing of good practices, not least concerning democracy, eco~~logy~~nomic growth, sustainable development, energy, transport, research and cultural and educational partnerships;

2012/01/31
Committee: CULT

2011/2179(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Recommends, in the interests of more harmonious cohabitation, improving lifelong learning, closer cooperation between universities in the future Mediterranean macro-region and the removal of obstacles to the movement of students and teachers; stresses the need to strengthen euro-Mediterranean university networks by building on the good practices of the Tempus and Erasmus Mundus programmes;

2012/01/31
Committee: CULT

2011/2179(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls for the implementation, in the next programming period, of a ‘Euro- Mediterranean Erasmus’ programme intended to encourage the transnational mobility of students from both sides of the Mediterranean as well as a ‘Euro- Mediterranean Leonardo da Vinci’ programme for young people who want to acquire professional training abroad, in the framework of a macro-regional strategy;

2012/01/31
Committee: CULT

2011/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Calls for an equitable distribution and alignment of the ENP financial programmes’ funding for mobility and support of civil society, so that ~~both~~ the Eastern and ~~the~~ Southern arenas ~~are equivalent in terms of EU external cooperation~~benefit from EU external cooperation in a balanced way which reflects the challenges they face;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers that the territorial cooperation principles apply also to external borders and are a key tool to improve EU economic development as well as the EU’s overall ENP political goals, including the promotion of democracy; takes the view that these targets can only be achieved with the cooperation of both civil society and regional and local authorities, the object being to find practical ways of meeting citizens’ needs on the ground; underlines that the Commission should extend its integrated approach in order to clearly support the local and regional authorities as one of its pillars and guarantors of the general interest;

2011/09/21
Committee: REGI

2011/2157(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Considers that the ENP must favour practical projects aimed at promoting institutional and economic support, investment, social cohesion, the environment, culture, mobility, and networking whereby local and regional authorities could learn to work together and exchange their best practices in order to exploit shared development opportunities;

2011/09/21
Committee: REGI

2011/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Considers the Union for the Mediterranean to have been misconceived, poorly executed and even counterproductive; insists, therefore, on the full incorporation of the European side of the partnership into the conventional EU framework under the auspices of the High Representative/Vice- President and the European External Action Service;deleted

2011/10/11
Committee: AFCO

2011/2157(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Underlines that the ENP should be considered broadly in order to fuel the economic development of bordering areas; stresses the positive impact of relaxing visa requirements for local border traffic and the development of regional markets, particularly regarding such groups as students, researchers, businesspeople, artists or journalists; in this respect, calls on the Commission to ~~propose an amendment to Article 3 of Regulation (EC) No 1931/2006 in order to enlarge the definition of ‘border area’ and~~adjust the definition of ‘border area’ according to territorial needs in order – where such action would be desirable – to increase the number of holders of local border travel rights, allowing them to move freely in the whole border region;

2011/09/21
Committee: REGI

2011/2157(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Affirms that the EU programmes for young people have had a great impact on enhancing educational opportunities for youth; appeals to the Member States, therefore, as far as possible to enable students from ENP countries to have access to education in Europe;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2157(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Actively supports the current process of relaunching the Union for the Mediterranean (UfM) and the governance arrangements recently put in place; calls for UfM projects to receive more, and more targeted, financial input from the funds authorised under the ENP’s funding instruments;

2011/10/11
Committee: AFCO

2011/2157(INI)

Constance LE GRIP, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Supports Parliament’s role in the ENP w~~hile noting the increased pressure on MEPs and Parliament’s services of~~ith regard to maintaining effectively the growing number of multilateral and bilateral forms of parliamentary cooperation; u~~rges continual assessment of the added value and practical organisation of EuroNest and the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly~~nderlines that the multilateral parliamentary assemblies, such as EuroNest and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean (PA-UfM), are crucial vectors of confidence- and coherence- building between the EU and the partner countries and among the partner countries themselves; emphasises the need for the PA-UfM to be recognised as the legitimate parliamentary institution of the UfM;

2011/10/11
Committee: AFCO

2011/2157(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Appreciates the impact of the Euro- Mediterranean University and indicates that this success should be publicised and that a similar initiative should be launched for the Eastern Partnership region;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2157(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises the need to enhance synergies between Youth on the Move and the ENP, in order to ensure that ~~learner~~student mobility between the EU and neighbourhood countries can benefit from more opportunities, in the interests both of the EU and of young people from those countries;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2157(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Stresses the importance of networks of local authorities (particularly town twinning), European public actors and ENP beneficiary states for increasing political, economic and cultural exchange with these countries; to that end, recommends better information and better assistance for project organisers and beneficiaries of ENPI funds; encourages the creation of European information and good practice exchange platforms;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2096(INI)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Franck PROUST, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Points out that transport networks play a leading role in spatial planning policies; notes that major transport infrastructure such as high-speed railways helps make regions less isolated while also boosting local development networks; highlights the importance of implementing specific regional projects linked to the construction of major infrastructure, involving as many partners as possible (local, regional and national authorities, private operators, civil society, etc.);

2011/09/21
Committee: REGI

2011/2096(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that urban transport services are covered by the subsidiarity principle; stresses, nevertheless, that European cooperation, coordination and funding would enable local authorities to meet the challenges they are facing~~; underlines the importance of interregional and cross- border cooperation with regard to the development of transport networks~~, by promoting inclusive growth and better social cohesion through the integrated management of urban, suburban and rural transport;

2011/09/21
Committee: REGI

2011/2096(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Recalls the importance of drawing up, planning and implementing joint transport infrastructure strategies at cross-border level, whether they relate to major freight corridors and trans- European transport networks or simply to regional, local and urban transport management in line with catchment areas and population; highlights the importance of European territorial cooperation in achieving these coordinated strategies, and the urgency of certain cross-border investments; calls for all macro-regional coordination to include an in-depth study of transport integration as part of its strategy, in order to achieve genuine social and territorial cohesion;

2011/09/21
Committee: REGI

2011/2096(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Seán KELLY

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Notes that ~~citie~~urban areas suffer most from congestion and air and noise pollution; in this context believes that ~~citie~~these areas can make a major contribution towards combating climate change through intelligent local public transport systems and sustainable city-district planning, including building of bicycle paths; calls for transport arrangements between ~~cities and the countryside~~urban, suburban and rural areas to be improved;

2011/09/21
Committee: REGI

2011/2087(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas sport is a key factor for health in modern society and is an essential part of a high-quality education, and it contributes to senior citizens’ personal fulfilment,

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas promoting physical activity and sport makes for significant savings in terms of public expenditure on health,

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Ivo BELET, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Seán KELLY

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas high-level sport is a showcase for certain core sporting values and conveys those values to society generally, encouraging participation in sport,

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Seán KELLY

Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)

Da. whereas it is essential to prepare such athletes for their career change by enabling them to receive general education or vocational training alongside their sports training,

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Seán KELLY

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas sport plays an important part in the European economy, as it directly or indirectly employs 15 million people, i.e. 5.4% of the working population, and represents an annual added value of approximately € 407 billion, or 3.65% of Europe’s GDP, and an economically flourishing sports sector thus contributes to achieving the aims of the Europe 2020 strategy,

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Ivo BELET, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas the violation of sports organisations’ intellectual property rights and the upsurge in digital piracy, especially the unlicensed live transmission of sports events, puts the economy of the entire sports sector at risk,

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Recital I

I. whereas the European model of sport is based on a federation for each sports discipline, and mechanisms for sports and financial solidarity, such as the principle of promotion and relegation and open competitions involving both clubs and national teams, are organised on an autonomous, democratic and territorial basis and in a pyramid structure,

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Emma McCLARKIN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Recital J

J. whereas 35 million amateurs assist the development of mass-participation sport, as do clubs and charitable sports associations and the dissemination of sporting ideals,

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Ivo BELET, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Seán KELLY

Motion for a resolution
Recital N

N. whereas professional sport is vulnerable to financial instability, and it is the responsibility of the relevant federations to encourage clubs to adopt a culture of planning and sensible investment,

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Ivo BELET, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Underlines the importance of encouraging access to sport for all and participation in sports activities in schools and universities from the earliest years onwards, as an integral part of the curriculum;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Emphasises that the composition of sports organisations’ decision-making bodies must reflect that of their AGMs as well as the gender balance among their licensed players, thus affording men and women equal access to administrative roles;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Cătălin Sorin IVAN, Marco SCURRIA, Emma McCLARKIN, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Recommends that the Commission encourage the practice of sport among senior citizens as it helps to promote social interaction and high rates of good health;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses the need to support the fight against doping, while respecting athletes’ individual freedom, with particular attention to the youngest athletes; urges the Member States to treat trafficking in illegal performance-enhancing substances in the same way as trafficking in illegal drugs and to adopt national legislation to this end;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Encourages Member States to take account of the experience of former sportspeople when they wish to become trainers, and to establish ~~specific~~ career paths designed for high-level athletes who decide to pursue a course of higher education and provide tutors for them;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Ivo BELET, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. Takes a positive view of the Member States’, in consultation with the European sports federations, drawing up minimum safety standards for stadiums and taking all appropriate measures to ensure that players and supporters are as safe as possible;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on Member States to refuse access to stadiums to supporters who have displayed violent or discriminatory behaviour, to cooperate closely to ensure that stadium bans remain in force for international matches in Member States other than that in which they were imposed and to set up a ~~European~~ database of those who have been banned;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Reiterates the importance of volunteers in sport and stresses the need to provide volunteers with proper training; is in favour of creating a legal and tax framework that is suitable for the activities of sports associations; ~~is also in favour of sponsorship in sport;~~

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to explore the feasibility of a tax framework geared to the brief and fluctuating careers of the lowest-paid sportspeople; considers that sportspeople should be entitled to the same social security rights as workers;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to recognise the property rights of the organisers of sports competitions with regard to the events they organise;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Emma McCLARKIN, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to protect intellectual property rights in respect of sports content, with due regard for the public’s right to information;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Cătălin Sorin IVAN, Piotr BORYS, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Underlines the fundamental importance of commercial exploitation of audiovisual rights for sports competitions being carried out on a centralised, exclusive and territorial basis, so as to ensure long-term financial solidarity between elite and mass-participation sport;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Considers that betting on sport is a form of commercial exploitation of competitions and calls on the Commission and the Member States to protect betting from unauthorised activities, in particular by recognising organisers’ ~~intellectual~~ property rights with regard to their competitions, guaranteeing a significant contribution from betting operators towards funding mass-participation sport and by protection the integrity of competitions;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Cătălin Sorin IVAN, Ivo BELET, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Reiterates its request that the Commission draw up guidelines on state aid, indicating what type of public support is legitimate with a view to achieving the social, cultural and educational goals of sport;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 b (new)

10b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to take practical action to promote exchanges of good practice and foster closer cooperation with regard to technical aspects and sports-related research;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Ivo BELET, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 c (new)

10c. Urges the Commission and the Member States to provide the Union with a specific budget programme in the field of sport, as is now possible under Article 165 TFEU;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls for ~~sport~~the Commission and the Member States to ben~~efit from the European Structural Funds~~courage the use of structural funding for the development of sport, which is crucial for local and regional development and for social integration;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Underlines that training for players at local level is needed for the sustainable development of European sport and that it is essential to ensure that top-level sport is not promoted at the expense of the development of the youngest players;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Considers that, as a regulated professional activity, the profession of sports agent should be subject to ~~a minimum qualification from a higher education establishment, and that sports agents’ fiscal residence should be within EU ter~~certification by an official EU sports authoritory;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Considers that, as a regulated professional activity, the profession of sports agent should be subject to a minimum qualification from a higher education establishment, and that sports agents’ fiscal residence should be within EU territory, in the interests of transparency;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Ivo BELET, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Welcomes the study carried out at the Commission’s request on the economic and legal impact of player transfers; also takes the view that the action taken by sports federations to make international transfers more transparent should be supported;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Ivo BELET, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20 a (new)

20a. Welcomes the efforts of sports federations to ban the ownership of more than one sports club engaged in the same competition; takes the view that betting operators should be prohibited from holding a controlling stake in a body which organises or participates in competitions, and that bodies which organise or participate in competitions should be prohibited from holding a controlling stake in an operator offering bets on the events they organise or in which they participate;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Urges Member States to make any form of attack on the integrity of competitions – in particular where such an attack is betting-related, meaning that it involves the intentional and fraudulent manipulation of the result of a competition or of one of its phases of play in order to gain an advantage not based solely on normal sporting practice or the associated uncertainty – a criminal offence;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Urges Member States to make any form of attack on the integrity of competitions a criminal offence, and to punish such attacks;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 a (new)

21a. Maintains that it is essential to develop instruments designed to foster cooperation between public authorities and sports authorities in relation to cases of sports fraud, and that cooperation with Europol and Eurojust could be envisaged;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Piotr BORYS, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Calls on the Commission to submit, by 2012, a proposal aimed at gaining a better understanding of the specific needs of the sports sector and taking practical action to address them, with full regard to the provisions of Article 165 TFEU;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Cătălin Sorin IVAN, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)

23a. Encourages the Commission and the Member States to acknowledge the importance of sport as a means of promoting peace, economic growth, intercultural dialogue, public health, integration and the emancipation of women;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – indent 1

– to promote information and communication campaigns concerning the added value of sport; to organise a ‘European Day of Sports’ every year;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 – indent 3

– to draw up a European ~~map~~charter of local, traditional sports and support its dissemination, for example by organising a festival of traditional sports;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2087(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. ~~Propose~~Suggests that the European flag ~~should~~ be flown at major sports events held on EU territory, and suggests t~~hat it should be~~o sports federations that they consider the idea of having it displayed on the clothing of athletes from Member States;

2011/09/09
Committee: CULT

2011/2068(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the flagship initiative on resource efficiency and points to its crucial influence on ~~the quality of life~~securing sustainable, smart and inclusive growth in Europe and improving the quality of life and the environment for present and future generations;

2011/07/14
Committee: REGI

2011/2068(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that in order to achieve a resource-efficient Europe, increased coordination and synergies between a wide range of policy areas and their various instruments should be implemented at regional, national and EU level with a view to ensuring their effectiveness; points out that regional policy already has a coordinated and integrated approach in place; notes that trade-offs between certain policy areas exist, and these need to be ~~address~~encouraged;

2011/07/14
Committee: REGI

2011/2068(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points to the crucial role of regional policy in supporting initiatives aiming at efficient use of resources, in particular in connection with building energy efficiency, investment in research, innovation and sustainable development, owing to its long-term development programmes, decentralised administration system and the incorporation of the EU’s priorities for sustainable development;

2011/07/14
Committee: REGI

2011/2068(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Draws attention to the importance of groups of regions and Member States drawing up joint strategies for effective resource use; stresses, in this connection, the important role that European territorial cooperation can play in securing coordinated strategies of this kind, as well as the urgent need to invest in cross-border energy and environmental infrastructure with a view to ensuring that resources are protected and moved more effectively; calls, furthermore, for macro- regional strategies focusing, in particular, on environmental protection and energy supply and independence to be drawn up;

2011/07/14
Committee: REGI

2011/2068(INI)

Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasizes that resource efficiency should be addressed at regional and local level, – taking into account the particularities and different development levels of European regions – and regional and local authorities and ~~partner~~civil-society representatives should be ~~directly~~ involved in the planning and implementation of relevant measures; this would lead to a greater feeling of responsibility ~~for~~and closer identification with the goals of resource efficiency at all levels;

2011/07/14
Committee: REGI

2011/2048(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Observes that, although important, the needs of cost reduction, legal certainty and simplification in public procurement rules must be carefully weighed against the impact of any changes on local and regional authorities, as well as on SMEs, an impact that should be clearly identified and assessed from the outset in order to avoid imposing excessive burdens on the competent authorities;

2011/05/31
Committee: REGI

2011/2036(INI)

Francisco José MILLÁN MON, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Invites the Member States to develop syllabuses for use in all EU countries; repeats its request to the Commission and the Member States to promote the inclusion – in studies at baccalaureate level or equivalent – of specific courses on the background, goals and operation of the European Union and its institutions, which will help young people to feel more involved in the process of European integration;

2011/06/16
Committee: CULT

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Sophie AUCONIE, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Maurice PONGA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Markus PIEPER, Philippe BOULLAND

Motion for a resolution
Citation 8 a (new)

- having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 July 2006 on a European grouping of territorial cooperation (EGTC),

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 17 a (new)

- having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions on the ‘Fifth Cohesion Report’, adopted on 1 April 2011,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Recital A b (new)

Ab. whereas cohesion policy represents a genuine citizens’ issue, bringing Europe into people’s daily lives and making it tangible and visible across the EU,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Markus PIEPER, Sophie AUCONIE, Philippe BOULLAND

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas the cohesion and structural policies have proved flexible in crisis situations and have made a defining contribution to various national recovery and training programmes, and whereas it is important to maintain this flexibility,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Markus PIEPER, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Jan OLBRYCHT, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas gearing the structural funds to the Lisbon Strategy objectives has proved effective, as is evident from the impressive commitment rates for the Convergence and the Regional Competitiveness and Employment objectives, a~~lthough it is regrettable that only~~nd whereas 20% of projects under the heading of Territorial Cooperation accord with the Lisbon aims,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas territorial cooperation aims to help territories and regions work together in tackling their common challenges, reduce the physical, administrative and regulatory barriers to such cooperation and lessen the ‘border effect’,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Recital D

D. whereas the partial failure of the Lisbon Strategy is due not to the inadequate implementation of cohesion policy but rather to the effects of the financial crisis, imperfect implementation of the single market, ~~slack budgetary discipline~~inappropriate framework of cooperation between Member States and inadequate macroeconomic framework conditions in individual Member States,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas the existing system of cohesion and structural policy objectives (Convergence, Regional Competitiveness and Employment, and European Territorial Cooperation), combined with a multi-level governance approach and security to plan on the basis of reliable funding and an agreed time frame (seven years), has ~~basic~~overally proved its worth, but whereas there have been considerable delays in programme planning as a result of protracted financial and legislative negotiations and substantial changes in the rules applying to cohesion policy,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC, Philippe BOULLAND, Rodi KRATSA-TSAGAROPOULOU, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Recital F a (new)

Fa. whereas, however, a significant threshold effect exists between regions with comparable levels of development but benefiting from very different levels of aid – growth regions exceeding the threshold of 75% of average per capita GDP for the EU in receipt of more financial support than stagnating regions above that threshold – and whereas this represents a real problem in terms of fairness between Europe’s regions,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Philippe BOULLAND, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Recital H

H. whereas a comprehensive European cohesion policy continues to be essential, given the ~~significant~~ imbalances between regional economies and in social terms and the geographical disadvantages of certain regions (particularly the outermost regions), as well as specific structural problems and ~~geographical disadvanta~~the need to adapt to new challenges, and it is also a requirement under the Lisbon Treaty,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1

1. Calls for cohesion and structural policy programmes to place more emphasis on European added value; deems such added value to be achieved where EU projects bring about a lasting and measurable improvement in the economic, territorial, infrastructural, social and/or environmental status of a ~~disadvantaged~~ region and such improvement would not have been achievable without the European stimulus,

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Recognises, too, that European funding adds value where projects supported at regional level contribute to the achievement of pan-European objectives in the fields of European integration, economic growth, research, environmental protection, culture, resource management, demographic change, energy supply sustainability, social cohesion or cross- border development and this would not have been realised without the European stimulus;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Emphasises that, despite the trend towards a narrowing of inter-regional disparities, major imbalances still exist – and in some Member States are actually growing – so cohesion policy must continue to concentrate on ~~evening out differences between regions’ levels of development~~reducing disparities and implementing harmonious development for all Europe’s regions;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC, Philippe BOULLAND, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Recognises the special needs of regions particularly disadvantaged by virtue of their geographical ~~situation or natural environme~~or demographic situation or specific constraints; reiterates its call for special forms of preference to continue to apply in respect of those types of region, mentioned in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, which are particularly disadvantaged (outermost regions, northernmost regions with very low population density and island, mountain and cross-border regions), and in particular the additional specific allocation granted to the outermost regions under the ERDF;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Emphasises that cohesion policy must continue to focus on regional (and territorial) cohesion and points out that the Lisbon Treaty added the objective of territorial cohesion to those of economic and social cohesion; affirms that this aim remains indissociable from the challenges of economic and social cohesion;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Sees macroregional strategies as affording a major opportunity to harness forms of trans-regional potential and adopt a joint approach to shared challenges s~~temming from the natural environment, e.g. in relation to~~uch as environmental protection; considers that better coordination of existing support mechanisms can create scope for more targeted use of the EU structural funds;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. ~~Doubts whether~~Stresses that specific operational programmes ~~for functional geographic~~, including multi-regional operational programmes, can yield additional benefits by meeting the shared chal len~~tit~~ges of functional territories such as metropolitan regions or, sea or river basins ~~will yield additional benefits; is particularly aware, in rel~~or mountain regions; considers that, in accordance with the partnership principle, the implementation tof such programmes~~, of the absence of political bodies (including democratically elected bodies) with a sufficiently wide- ranging remit to implement them; calls instead~~ is a shared responsibility which should be preserved; calls for closer coordination of macroregional or natural-environment strategies at inter-governmental levels;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Markus PIEPER, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Jan OLBRYCHT

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Rejects the use of obligatory quotas in particular for national allocations under ESF/ERDF programmes, for local and urban development, for the countryside or otherwise according to categorisation on the basis of population density or territorial function~~; also regards as questionable~~ could ensure a bigger critical mass of interventions; the requirement to specify already at operational programme level which urban and other areas are to be eligible for support~~, and calls~~ is an option that should be prioritised when this method ensures added value and concentration of aid intensity this needs to be negotiated on the basis of the principles of multi-level- governance; it is up for the Member States and regions to ~~be allowed to~~ organise competitive selection procedures in this respect as well;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

~~12. Emphasises that structural and cohesion policy must not be biased towards specific types of region; calls for urban-rural partnerships to be seen in their broader socio-economic context;~~deleted

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Tamás DEUTSCH, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Erminia MAZZONI

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Emphasises that support from the Cohesion Fund and the Structural Funds must be more strongly oriented towards the educational, cultural and socio-political challenges of the EU 2020 strategy; takes the view, however, that across-the-board ‘Europeanisation’ of the relevant policy areas would be a doomed endeavour purely on financial grounds; calls, therefore, for the further development of approaches that could serve as models, while retaining existing national and regional competences while respecting the subsidiarity;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Sees scope under the Structural Funds for ~~specifically~~ supporting investment in energy infrastructure, although such support must be available onespecially in regions where political or geographical constraints significantly hamper the ability of the market to meet energy-supply needs; calls, too, for support from the Structural Funds to be made contingent in all cases on the adoption of a commercial approach and of compliance with the principle of multi- level governance;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Tamás DEUTSCH, Sabine VERHEYEN, Joachim ZELLER, Hermann WINKLER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Emphasises that the trans-European transport networks play a decisive role in European regional cohesion and that development of TEN infrastructure, Motorways of the Sea and designated E- roads must therefore be stepped up and access to them improved, especially in border regions~~; suggests that ‘infrastructure’ be accorded more importance as a category of project eligible for support in connec~~ and outermost regions,; suggests that certain crossborder ‘infrastructure’ shall be considered as priority projects eligible to funds of the objective 1, 2 and 3 calls for a obligatory right to make the first proposal of the regional level for this type of action and equal participation ~~with~~of the ~~third objective of European Territorial Cooperation;~~ border regions and local authorities in the planning;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Seán KELLY

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16 a (new)

16a. supports economic development and employment in SMEs and micro- enterprises; therefore requests that the fundamentals of the Small Business Act for Europe (SBAE), i.e. "Think Small First" and "Only once ", are considered as one of the bases of cohesion policy and considers that these principles should be applied by Member States and regions in the definition of their operational programs;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC, Philippe BOULLAND, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 17

17. Emphasises that the core components of the EU 2020 strategy (innovation, education and training, energy, environment, employment, competitiveness, skills and combating poverty) are already integral to the cohesion and structural policies; takes the view that the EU 2020 challenges can be integrated very easily into the ~~system of three objectives (Convergence, Regional Competitiveness and Employment, and European Territorial Cooperation), which has proved its effectiveness~~architecture of the cohesion policy;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND, Rodi KRATSA-TSAGAROPOULOU, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls for ~~a dependable and appropriate phasing-out arrangement for areas formerly eligible for maximum support under~~the creation of a new intermediate category for regions with per capita GDP between 75% and 90% of the EU average, in order to resolve political problems (unequal treatment of regions in spite of their similar situations) and practical problems (difficulty of managing degressive funding) linked to the current phasing-out arrangement; considers that the creation of such a category will be made possible by the fact that a large number of regions have passed the threshold of 75% of the EU average per capita GDP and will thus automatically cease to be covered by the convergence objective; stresses that this change to the architecture of the cohesion policy should neither penalise regions currently benefiting from the Cconvergence objective ~~(convergence regions)~~and the competitiveness objective, nor lead to an increase in the cohesion policy budget; considers that this new category will make it possible to strengthen the justice and solidarity which are the fundamental principles of the cohesion policy;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls for Objective 2 (Regional Competitiveness and Employment), which is based on a cross-cutting approach, to be upgraded; rejects any cut in funding for regions currently eligible for Objective 2; stresses that the proven system of innovation clusters and competition for funding needs to be developed further;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Jan OLBRYCHT, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND, Rodi KRATSA-TSAGAROPOULOU, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Takes the view that a general new funding category based on GDP/PE between the 75% and 90% rates would be at odds with the tried and tested principles of EU cohesion policy (to support the weakest and pool the inherent potential of the wealthier regions, taking a cross- cutting approach), and therefore rejects this intermediate category;deleted

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Philippe BOULLAND, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Takes the unequivocal view that efforts under Objective 3 (European Territorial Cooperation) need to be stepped up at all EU internal borders and at all three levels of such cooperation (cross-border, inter- regional and trans-national) and calls for the relevant share of the structural funds to be increased to 7%; calls for the allocation of funding for each territorial cooperation programme to be based on harmonised criteria in order to provide a strategic and integrated response to the needs and specificities of each geographical territory and area concerned; stresses the importance of the border regions in terms of achievement of the EU 2020 objectives; considers that there is a need ~~for closer linkage with the TEN network~~to increase the coordination of the TEN networks and their subsidies – in line with European priorities – and with cross-border infrastructure, and calls for a corresponding increase in funding for all border regions;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Considers that EGTCs represent a unique, highly valuable territorial governance instrument which responds to the needs for structured cooperation, and must be promoted as a tool to set up systems of cross-border governance, ensuring the ownership of the different policies at regional and local level;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Philippe BOULLAND, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Calls for the ESF, as a component of cohesion policy, to continue to foster social integration, economic growth and employment; regards the ESF as the Union’s most important labour-market and employment-policy tool; attaches particular importance to developing skills and mobility~~, enhancing equality of opportunity between the sexes,~~ – with priority being assigned to training which meets local needs –, enhancing equality of opportunity between the sexes and people with disabilities, integrating and socially reintegrating people who are disadvantaged and supporting SMEs and the self-employed;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

27. Draws attention to the synergies achievable through integrated approaches, notably linking the ESF and the ERDF, and calls for the option of cross-financing between these funds – specifically with a view to integrated development planning – to be facilitated; calls, furthermore, for better synergies between the EDF and the ERDF;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Joachim ZELLER, Tamás DEUTSCH, Sabine VERHEYEN

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 29

29. Suggests, in this context, that reintegration of the regionally oriented EAFRD (Axes 3 and 4) programmes be considered~~, and calls~~; considers, however, that such reintegration must not result in any reduction in the budgets for the ERDF and EAFRD; calls, furthermore, for binding targets to be set for the Member States and the regions in order to establish more standardised arrangements for administering the EU structural funds and the regionally oriented rural development programmes;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

33. Calls for the mandatory involvement of ~~federal Länder and regions~~regional and local authorities, in accordance with constitutional and institutional set up of Member States, in drawing up development partnerships and operational programmes; considers it essential to make appropriate provision for this in the regulations governing the Structural Funds;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Philippe BOULLAND, Sophie AUCONIE

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 34

34. Supports the ~~system of thematic priorities that the Commission is proposing; points out that the lower the level of development in a Member State or reg~~principle of a Community thematic menu that the Commission is proposing, on condition, th~~e more wide-ranging the list of priorities there needs to be, taking into~~at it is sufficiently broad to take account of the specific ~~regional development needs~~needs of each European region;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 37

37. Calls for the funding under investment partnerships to be made conditional ~~on the implementation of reforms by the Member State~~, for Member States to be called upon to implement reforms, in order to ensure that it is used efficiently in areas directly related to cohesion policy; considers it fair for such conditions to include, in particular, full implementation of existing EU legislation (e.g. on price regulation, tendering procedures, transport, the environment and health) in order to prevent irregularities and ensure effectiveness; rejects, however, the imposition of conditions requiring Member States to undertake fundamental social and economic reform;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Philippe BOULLAND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 39

39. Calls for the indicators to concentrate on areas of impact with European added value (increases in productivity, research, transport services, regional growth and relevant environmental improvements); calls for quantitative targets to be eschewed when measuring progress in areas where responsibility rests largely with national authorities (i.e. on educational standards, poverty thresholds and integration) and for assessment, instead, of projects’ potential as models and of the degree of innovation they display;deleted

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 42

42. Calls, in the case of direct subsidies to undertakings, for it to be recognised that Cohesion Policy funding, rather than influencing decisions by companies – and particularly bigger companies – to open a plant in a given location, tends to be pocketed by companies which have already taken such decisions (deadweight effect), and calls, therefore, for support for undertakings to focus on investment in research and development or for it to be provided, in more cases, indirectly through infrastructure financing; also calls for clear provisions to be included in the general regulation governing the Structural Funds ruling out EU support for the relocation of undertakings within the Union~~, and for a substantial lowering of the threshold for review of relocation investments~~;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51

51. Calls, in respect of Member States that ~~are falling significantly short of the EU stability criteria requirements and also~~ have a poor record on the use of monies from the structural funds, for a proposal for ~~the automatic application of~~ more stringent rules in order to monitor the use of such monies in accordance with the law and the relevant objectives; calls, at the same time, for unnecessary controls to be done away with in those Member States that have a satisfactory fund management system; considers that the ‘contract of confidence’ and ‘single audit’ principles should be implemented wherever possible;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Philippe BOULLAND, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 53

53. Envisages that the Commission will, in future, have a greater responsibility for the improvement of national administrative procedures; takes the view, therefore, that it will be incumbent on the Commission to implement accreditation procedures for national or federal-state administrative and auditing bodies; envisages linkage between, on the one hand, successful accreditation and a reduction in the error rate and, on the other, entitlement to simplified and less frequent reporting;deleted

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54 a (new)

54a. Is concerned at the fact that red tape is preventing small companies and organisations from gaining access to structural funding; calls for the relevant rules and technical documentation to be made as clear as possible, and asks the Commission and the Member States to set up technical working parties with a view to identifying appropriate simplification measures;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Sophie AUCONIE, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ, Philippe BOULLAND

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 55

55. Supports the Commission’s proposal that national authorities should not receive reimbursement until the EU funding has been paid out to the beneficiaries; envisages that this will speed up payment procedures and will be a crucial incentive to carry out stringent national auditing; notes, however, that cashflow problems could potentially arise at Member State or ~~federal-state~~regional level and that appropriate hedging arrangements will have to be made;

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2035(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Markus PIEPER, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57

57. Emphasises the importance in terms of cohesion policy of the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) promoting cross-border cooperation with states outside the EU; is convinced of the ultimate necessity to reincorporate the ENPI cross-border cooperation programmes into the cohesion policy's Territorial Cooperation Objective; sees infrastructure (transport and energy) links with neighbouring countries as having particularly positive effects on the European border regions; calls for ENPI funding to focus more closely on strategic needs in relation to energy and to transport infrastructure; calls on the Commission to look into the feasibility of establishing better synergies between ERDF initiatives, the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance, the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) and the European Development Fund (EDF);

2011/04/20
Committee: REGI

2011/2023(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Calls for the establishment of a European civil protection force capable of intervening swiftly and effectively at regional and local level, as part of the effort to achieve territorial cohesion in the EU;

2011/05/30
Committee: REGI

2011/0436(APP)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 4 a (new)

(4a) In order to increase the involvement of EU citizens in EU affairs, the programme ought also to take into account the European Parliament’s resolution of 14 June 2012 on public consultations and their availability in all EU languages1, paragraph 2 of which urges the Commission to ensure that every EU citizen’s right to address the EU institutions in any of the EU official languages is fully respected and implemented by ensuring that public consultations are available in all EU official languages, that all consultations are treated equally and that there is no language-based discrimination between consultations. __________________ Texts Adopted, P7_TA-PROV(2012)0256.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The new programme should cover a wide spectrum of different actions and include, among others, citizens' meetings, contacts and debates on citizenship issues, Union level events, initiatives to reflect on defining moments in European history, initiatives to raise awareness, particularly amongst young people, about the Union institutions and their functioning, and debates on European policy issues, with a view to invigorate all aspects of public life.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The new programme should cover a wide spectrum of different actions and include, among others, citizens' meetings, contacts and debates on citizenship issues, Union level events, initiatives to reflect on defining moments in European history, initiatives to raise awareness about the Union institutions and their functioning, including visits to the European institutions, and debates on European policy issues, with a view to invigorate all aspects of public life.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 10 a (new)

(10a) Participation by natural persons in the Member States' overseas countries or territories who possess European citizenship and by public and/or private organisations and institutions in those countries or territories should be recognised and encouraged with a view to strengthening the link with the Union and disseminating EU values in the most effective way in these staging posts of the Union in the world.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – paragraph 2 – indent 1

– Strengthen remembrance, promote a Europe united in its cultural diversity and enhance capacity for civic participation at the Union level.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

1. Rraise awareness on remembrance, the Union's history, identity and aim and promote education for European citizenship by stimulating debate, reflection and networking;

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point 1 – subpoint 1

1. raise awareness on remembrance, the Union'’s history, identity and aims by stimulating debate, reflection and networking to help bring citizens and associations from all over Europe closer together;

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

2. bring European citizens closer together, foster intercultural dialogue and encourage democratic and civic participation of citizens at Union level, by developing citizens' understanding of the Union policy making-process and promoting opportunities for societal engagement and volunteering at Union level.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) ‘DFostering democratic engagement ~~and~~, civic participation and the sense of belonging to the Union’.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) Democratic engagement, intercultural dialogue and civic participation

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – indent 8 a (new)

– Educational programmes taught in educational establishments at all levels, from junior school upwards

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – indent 11

– Support ofor programme information/advice structures and resource centres in the Member States

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – indent 11

– Support ofor programme information/advice structures in the Member States at national, regional or local level

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point a

(a) the Member States and their overseas countries and territories (OCTs), as listed in Annex II to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1

The programme shall be open to all stakeholders promoting European integration, in particular local authorities and organisations, European public policy research organisations (think-tanks), citizens'’ groups and other civil society organisations (such as voluntary and survivors'’ associations), and educational and research institutions.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 1

The Commission shall have a regular dialogue with the beneficiaries of the programme and relevant ~~stakehold~~partners and experts.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1

The Commission shall ensure the coherence and the complementarity between this programme and instruments in other areas of Union action, especially education, vocational training, culture, sport, fundamental rights and freedoms, social inclusion, gender equality, combating discrimination, research and innovation, the enlargement policy, the neighbourhood policy – particularly its cross-border strand– and the Union external action.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Annex – part 1 – Strand 1 – paragraph 2

It will support activities that invite to reflection on common values in the broadest sense, taking into account diversity. Funds may be available for initiatives reflecting on causes of totalitarian regimes in Europe's modern history (especially but not exclusively Nazism and Stalinism) and to commemorate their victims. The strand should also encompass activities concerning other reference points in recent European history. In particular, it will give preference to actions which encourage tolerance ~~and~~, reconciliation and a sense of belonging to the Union with a view to reaching the younger generation.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Annex – part 1 – Strand 2 – paragraph 1

The strand is defined by the possible projects and initiatives that can be launched under its heading, not by the type of civic organisations or actors that can apply. The strand will accommodate activities that cover civic participation in the broadest sense, with particular focus on structuring methods for long-term sustainability. It will give preference to initiatives and projects with a clear link to the European political agenda, focusing in particular on small projects.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Annex – part 1 – Strand 2 – paragraph 3

~~Much rema~~The programme must be especially appealinsg to ~~be done to attract more women~~young people and to women in order to ensure that they are fully involved in political and economic decision- making~~. Women’s voices should be better heard and acted upon by those responsible for taking the policy decisions that impact on people’s lives~~, and participate fully in democracy and society.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Annex – part 2 – paragraph 2

In general, preference will be given to grants for projects with a high impact, in particular those which are directly linked to Union policies with a view to participate in the shaping of the Union political agenda. The involvement of organisers of small- scale projects must nonetheless be facilitated.

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0436(APP)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex – part 3 – Specific objective 1 – introductory wording

Specific objective 1: Raise awareness on remembrance, the Union’s history, identity and aims by stimulating debate, reflection and networking to help bring citizens and associations from all over Europe closer together;

2012/10/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8 a (new)

(8a) As cross-border cooperation is a key priority of Union policy, and since it is intended to help promote economic and social development in regions on both sides of common borders, address challenges in areas such as the environment, culture, public health and the prevention of and fight against organised crime, ensure efficient and secure borders and promote local cross- border people-to-people actions and mutual understanding, more substantive appropriations should be allocated to the instrument established by this Regulation.

2012/05/21
Committee: CULT

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20 a (new)

(20a) The Union recognises the importance of cooperation in the fields of culture and education and its vital role in strengthening civil society, promoting democratisation and encouraging both mutual understanding amongst people and social cohesion.

2012/05/21
Committee: CULT

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) Support under this Instrument and the European Regional Development Fund should be provided for the Cross-Border Cooperation programmes along the external borders of the European Union between partner countries and Member States to promote integrated and sustainable regional development between neighbouring border regions and harmonious territorial integration across the Union and with neighbouring countries. In order to ensure that Cross-Border Cooperation programmes are implemented smoothly at the external borders, it is important that the rules governing them should be harmonised with those laid down for European Territorial Cooperation programmes.

2012/05/03
Committee: REGI

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point c

(c) creating conditions for well managed mobility of people and promotion of people-to-people contacts furthering mutual understanding;

2012/05/21
Committee: CULT

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 2 – point d

(d) sustainable and inclusive development in all aspects, poverty reduction, including through private-sector development; promotion of internal economic, social and territorial cohesion, rural development, climate action, development of cultural heritage and disaster resilience;

2012/05/21
Committee: CULT

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 4

4. Union support may also be used in other areas when this is consistent with the overall objectives of the European Neighbourhood Policy, and particularly in the fields of culture, the cultural and creative industries, tourism, education and training.

2012/05/21
Committee: CULT

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point g

(g) contributions to current and future macro-regional strategies and to the transnational programmes established under Regulation (EU) No […] of the European Parliament and the Council of [….] on specific provisions for the support from the European Regional Development Fund to the European Territorial Co- operation goal, to which partner countries and/or the Russian Federation participate.

2012/05/21
Committee: CULT

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point g

g) contributions to current and future macro-regional strategies and to the transnational programmes established under Regulation (EU) No […] of the European Parliament and the Council of [….] on specific provisions for the support from the European Regional Development Fund to the European Territorial Co- operation goal, to which partner countries and/or the Russian Federation participate.

2012/05/03
Committee: REGI

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1

1. The financial envelope available for implementing this Regulation over the period 2014 to 2020 shall be EUR 18 182 300 000 (current prices). Up to 57% of the financial envelope shall be allocated to the Cross-Border Cooperation programmes referred to in Article 6(1) (c).

2012/05/21
Committee: CULT

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – paragraph 10

10. If a participating country undertakes to jointly co-finance a programme, the joint operational programme shall clarify the arrangements for providing, using and monitoring the co-financing. ~~The related financing agreement shall be signed by all participating countries.~~

2012/05/03
Committee: REGI

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 3

3. In order to allow the joint operational programmes to prepare adequately for implementation, expenditure incurred ~~after the~~shall be eligible from the date of submission of the ~~joint~~ operational programmes to the Commission ~~shall be eligible at the earliest from 1 January 2014~~or from 1 January 2014, whichever is earlier.

2012/05/03
Committee: REGI

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

2. Matters covered by the Implementing Rules shall include provisions on, inter alia:

2012/05/03
Committee: REGI

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) the content, preparation, modification and closure of joint operational programmes;

2012/05/03
Committee: REGI

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point c

(c) the role and function of the programme structures: Joint Monitoring Committee, Managing Authority and its Joint Technical Secretariat, ~~Join~~project Sselection committees, including ~~their~~its standing, effective identification, accountability and responsibility, description of Management and Control Systems, and conditions on the technical and financial management of Union support, including eligibility of expenditure, and recovery procedures;

2012/05/03
Committee: REGI

2011/0405(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 2 – point d

(d) ~~recovery procedures;~~ the monitoring and evaluation of joint operational programmes;

2012/05/03
Committee: REGI

2011/0401(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 21

(21) The implementation of Horizon 2020 should respond to the evolving opportunities and needs from science and technology, industry, policies and society and in the cultural sector. As such, the agendas should be set in close liaison with stakeholders from all sectors concerned, and sufficient flexibility should be allowed for new developments. External advice should be sought on a continuous basis during Horizon 2020, also making use of relevant structures such as European Technology Platforms, Joint Programming Initiatives and the European Innovation Partnerships.

2012/06/08
Committee: CULT

2011/0401(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 3 – point b

(b) research activity intended to modify the genetic heritage of human beings ~~which could make such changes heritable~~;

2012/06/08
Committee: CULT

2011/0401(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3 – point e a (new)

(ea) partner-based research and the establishment of networks to ensure better-quality planning;

2012/06/08
Committee: CULT

2011/0401(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – part I – point 3 – point 3.3 – point b – paragraph 2

Key activities shall be to encourage experienced researchers to broaden or deepen their skills by means of mobility by opening attractive career opportunities in universities, research institutions, businesses, SMEs and other socio- economic groups all over Europe and beyond, while taking account of the role of young people in the science sector. Opportunities to restart a research career after a break shall also be supported.

2012/06/08
Committee: CULT

2011/0401(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – part II – point 1 – point 1.2 – point 1.2.3 – point b

Advancing scientific knowledge of the potential impact of nanotechnologies and nanosystems on health or on the environment, and providing tools for risk assessment and management along the entire life cycle, and to enable people with disabilities to be more fully integrated into society.

2012/06/08
Committee: CULT

2011/0401(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – part III – point 6.3 – point 6.3.3 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) fight crime ~~and~~, terrorism and illegal immigration;

2012/06/08
Committee: CULT

2011/0401(COD)

Salvador SEDÓ i ALABART, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Annex 1 – part IV – point 3 – paragraph 2

The JRC's key competence areas will be energy, transport, environment and climate change, agriculture and food security, health and consumer protection, the protection of the historical, artistic and cultural heritage, information and communication technologies, reference materials, and safety and security (including nuclear in the Euratom programme).

2012/06/08
Committee: CULT

2011/0399(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. An European Grouping of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) or other legal body established under the laws of one of the participating countries, may participate in the action provided that it is set up by public authorities and bodies from at least two participating countries and provided that the conditions laid down in this regulation have been met, as well as any conditions laid down in the relevant work programme or work plan.

2012/07/02
Committee: ITRE

2011/0399(COD)

Salvador SEDÓ i ALABART, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, an EGTC, within the meaning of article 6, may apply as sole beneficiary for an operation.

2012/07/02
Committee: ITRE

2011/0399(COD)

Salvador SEDÓ i ALABART, Ramon TREMOSA i BALCELLS, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, in the case of a project coordinated by a European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation, the minimum condition shall be the participation of two legal entities established in two different Member States or associated countries.

2012/07/02
Committee: ITRE

2011/0384(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 1 – point 6 – point c

Regulation (EC) No 294/2008
Article 7 – paragraph 3

3. The minimum condition to form a KIC is the participation of at least three partner organisations, established in at least three different Member States. When one of the partner organisations is a European grouping of territorial cooperation (EGTC), the EIT shall lay down specific provisions that take account of the fact that the EGTC is international in nature. All these partner organisations must be independent of each other, within the meaning of Article 7 of the Rules for Participation.;

2012/06/29
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 8

(8) The programme should include a strong international dimension particularly as regards higher education, not only to enhance the quality of European higher education in pursuit of the broader ET2020 objectives and the attractiveness of the Union as a study destination, but also to promote understanding between people and contribution to the sustainable development of higher education in the overseas countries and territories associated with the European Union and the third countries.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) The action of the European Youth Forum, the National Academic Recognition Centres (NARIC), the Eurydice, Euroguidance and Eurodesk networks, as well as of the eTwinning National Support Services, the Europass National Centres, and the National Information Offices in the neighbourhood countries is essential in order to achieve the objectives of the programme, notably by providing the Commission with regular and updated information regarding the various fields of their activity and through the dissemination of the Programme results in the Union, in the overseas countries and territories associated with it and in the ~~third~~ participating third countries.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) The Communication from the Commission on "Developing the European Dimension in Sport" of 18 January 2011 sets out the Commission’s ideas for Union- level action in the field of sport after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty and proposes a list of concrete actions for the Commission and Member States to increase sport’s European identity in three broad chapters: the societal role of sport, the economic dimension of sport and the organisation of sport.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28 a (new)

(28a) Individuals from an OCT and competent public and/or private bodies and institutions from an OCT may participate in the Union programmes in accordance with the provisions laid down in the Council Decision on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Union.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point 4

4. Cooperation for innovation and good practices means transnational cooperation projects involving organisations active in the fields of education, training ~~and/or youth~~, youth and sport and may include other organisations.;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point 28 a (new)

28a. ‘grassroots sport’ means all sports developed, promoted and/or organised for the largest possible number of beneficiaries;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a

(a) T~~heir t~~ransnational, cross-border character, in particular transnational mobility and cooperation aiming at ~~long-term~~a sustainable systemic impact;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point b

(b) Their complementarity and synergy with other local national, international and other Union programmes and policies~~, allowing for economies of scale and critical mass~~;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point d – introductory part

(d) To enhance the international dimension of education, training and youth notably in higher education by increasing the attractiveness of the Union higher education institutions and supporting the Union external action, including its development objectives through the promotion of mobility and cooperation between ~~EU and third country~~ higher education institutions in the EU and the OCTs associated with it, on the one hand, and third countries, on the other, and targeted capacity building in third countries.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – point d – introductory part

(d) To enhance the international dimension of education, training and youth notably in higher education by increasing the attractiveness of the Union higher education ~~institutions~~and research institutions (as a complement to the Marie Curie- Skłodowska programme) and supporting the Union external action, including its development objectives through the promotion of mobility and cooperation between EU and third country higher education institutions and targeted capacity building in third countries.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) transnational mobility of higher education and vocational training students as well as of young people involved in non-formal activities, young amateur athletes and coaches between the participating countries as referred in Article 18. This mobility may take the form of studying at a partner institution, traineeships abroad or participating in youth activities, notably volunteering. Degree mobility at Masters level shall be supported through the student loan guarantee facility as referred to in Article 14 (3).

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new) - introductory wording (new)

2a. In the field of Leonardo da Vinci (VET), learning mobility of individuals between participating countries shall support:

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 a (new) - point a (new)

(a) The mobility of students in vocational training, apprentices and jobseekers in the form of studying at a partner institution or carrying out traineeships or apprenticeships abroad;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

(ba) partnerships set up under the aegis of European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTC), to which particular attention shall be paid.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Romana JORDAN, Rodi KRATSA-TSAGAROPOULOU, Seán KELLY, Gianni PITTELLA, Marco SCURRIA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 2

2. This action shall also support policy dialogue with third countries (particularly the southern Mediterranean countries) and international organizsations.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – point c – point ii a (new)

(iia) the Euro-Mediterranean University (EMUNI University).

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part

(a) To tackle transnational threats to sport such as violence, doping, match fixing~~, violence, racism and intolerance~~ and any other type of crime with due regard for individual rights;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(aa) To tackle all types of discrimination in sport based on race, sex, sexual orientation, physical or intellectual disability and religion inter alia;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part

(b) To support good governance ~~in sport and dual careers of athletes~~and integrity in sport;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part

(b) To support ~~good governance in sport and dual careers of athle~~the dual careers of athletes taking into account the best practices applied in each Member States;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part

(c) To promote social inclusion, and equal opportunities ~~and health-enhancing physical activity through increased participation in sport.~~;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c – introductory part

(c) To promote ~~social inclusion, equal opportunities and~~ health-enhancing physical activity through increased participation in sport., especially for older people;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c b (new)

(cb) To ensure that sport and physical activity become subjects taught in all types of schools in order to promote the practice of sport and physical activity at all levels of education;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c c (new)

(cc) To support local, traditional and indigenous sports that are part of the rich cultural and historical diversity of the EU;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c d (new)

(cd) To support the European model of sport, within which federations play a central role and which has various actors, including supporters, players, clubs, leagues, associations and volunteers at its base, which have a fundamental role for the entire sport structure.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

1. The objectives of cooperation in Sthe field of sport shall be pursued through the following transnational activities, which shall mainly focus on grassroots sport:

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) support tofor cross-border and transnational collaborative projects;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b

(b) support ~~to non-commercial~~for European sport events ~~involving several European countries~~run by non-profit organisations, which are recognised by national authorities or the representatives thereof and which aim to promote the widest possible access to sport both in a leisure context and otherwise;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 12 – paragraph 1 – point b a (new)

(ba) support to the organisation of a European Sports Day or Week that promotes the social and cultural role of amateur and professional sport and the benefits of sport in terms of public health;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3

3. The Commission shall provide the funding for guarantees for loans to students resident in a participating country as defined in Article 18(1) undertaking a full Masters degree in another participating country, to be delivered, in a transparent manner, through a trustee with a mandate to implement it on the basis of fiduciary agreements setting out the detailed rules and requirements governing the implementation of the financial instrument as well as the respective obligations of the parties. The financial instrument shall comply with the provisions regarding financial instruments in the Financial Regulation and in the Delegated Act replacing the Implementing Rules. In accordance with Article 18(2) of the Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002, revenues and repayments generated by the guarantees should be assigned to the financial instrumentis experimental form of financing must, in no case, replace mobility grants or constitute a means of funding the structural cost of the studies in question. This financial instrument, including market needs, students’ needs and take-up, will be subject to the monitoring and evaluation as referred to in Article 15(2). The Member States shall be involved in implementing and evaluating the scheme.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. The actions of the Programme shall be implemented in ways that provide for adaptation of the financial rules to address the constraints created by the remoteness of the outermost regions and overseas countries and territories, and to fund area-specific mobility projects linking the Union’s outermost regions and overseas countries and territories with neighbouring third countries.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) the Member States and their overseas countries and territories listed in Annex II to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 18 – paragraph 3

3. The Programme shall support the cooperation with partners from third countries, notably partners from neighbourhood countries (particularly the southern Mediterranean countries), in actions and activities as referred to in Articles 6 and 10.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – point a

(a) the relevant Union policies, in particular those in the fields of culture and the media, employment, health, research and innovation, enterprise, justice, consumer, development and cohesion policy, as well as with the Union’s territorial cooperation programmes and macro-regional strategies, such as the European Union Strategy for the Baltic Sea Region and the European Union Strategy for the Danube Region;

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1

1. The Commission shall be assisted by ~~a committee. That~~three sector-based committees (for education/training, youth and sport). Those committees shall be a committees within the meaning of Regulation (EU) No 182/2011.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0371(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 30 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

The committees may meet in various configurations to discuss matters of common interest.

2012/10/11
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) One of the greatest challenges of the cultural and creative sectors, especially small operators including non-profit organisations, small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) and micro-enterprises, is their difficulty accessing the funds they need to finance their activities, grow, maintain their competitiveness or internationalise. While this is a common challenge for ~~SME~~these operators in general, the situation is significantly more difficult in the cultural and creative sectors due to the intangible nature of many of their assets, the prototype profile of their activities, the lack of investment-readiness of the operators in the sectors as well as the insufficient investor-readiness of financial institutions.

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 16 a (new)

(16a) Individuals from overseas countries and territories (OCTs) and competent public and/or private bodies and institutions from an OCT may participate in Union programmes in accordance with the provisions laid down in the Council Decision on the association of the overseas countries and territories with the European Union.

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) Participation in the programme will also be open to acceding countries, candidate countries and potential candidates benefiting from a pre-accession strategy, in accordance with the general principles and general terms and conditions for the participation of those countries in Union programmes established in the respective Framework Agreements, Association Council Decisions or similar agreements; to EFTA countries which are parties to the EEA Agreement and to countries of the European neighbourhood area in accordance with the procedures defined with those countries following the framework agreements providing for their participation in European Union programmes. The participation of the Swiss Confederation is subject to specific arrangements with that country.

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 23

(23) With regard to the implementation of the Programme, the intrinsic value of culture and the specific nature of the cultural and creative sectors, including the importance of non-profit making organisations and projects under the Culture Strand, should be taken into account, and particular care should be taken to ensure that administrative and financial procedures are simplified.

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point a a (new)

(aa) the promotion of intercultural dialogue to harness Europe’s cultural diversity and, at the same time, build up a cultural area shared by Europeans;

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point d

(d) ensuring a more level playing field in the European cultural and creative sectors by, taking account, in particular, of low production capacity countries and/or countries or regions with a restricted geographical and linguistic area.

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – point b a (new)

(ba) to help provide the broadest possible public access to culture, from the youngest age groups upwards.

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – point a

(a) transnational exchange of experiences and knowhow on new ~~business~~economic models, peer-learning activities and networking among cultural operators and policy makers related to the development of the cultural and creative sectors;

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – point f – indent 5 a (new)

– support the establishment of Creative Europe contact points at local level;

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point a

a) supporting actions providing operators with skills and know-how encouraging the adaption to digital technologies, including testing new approaches to audience building and ~~business~~economic and management models;

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point b

b) supporting actions enabling operators to internationalise their ~~career~~activities in Europe and beyond;

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – point a

a) cooperation ~~measure~~projects bringing together operators from different countries to undertake sectoral or cross-sectoral activities;

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – point c

c) ~~activities by organisations providing a promotional European platform for the development of emerging talent~~structural projects for the exchange, promotion and ~~stim~~circulati~~ng the circulation~~on beyond their own borders of artists ~~and~~, works~~, with a systemic and large scale effec~~ and professionals, particularly emerging talent;

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – point d

d) projects to support ~~for~~ literary translation, subtitling of audiovisual works and surtitling of live performances of works;

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – point e

e) special actions aiming to achieve greater visibility for the richness and diversity of European cultures, and stimulate intercultural dialogue and mutual understanding, including European cultural prizes, the European Heritage Label, festivals, art festivals and the European Capitals of Culture.

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 10 – point e a (new)

ea) actions to promote artistic and cultural education from the very earliest age;

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – point c a (new)

ca) promoting activities helping European and international co-production partners to meet and/or provide indirect support for audiovisual works co-produced;

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 2 – point c

c) supporting audience building as a means of stimulating interest for audiovisual works in particular through promotion, events, film and media literacy and festivals;

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1 – point a

(a) relevant EU policies, in particular those in the fields of education, training, youth provision, citizenship, employment, health, research and innovation, enterprise, tourism, justice and development;

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – title

P~~rovisions concerning non-EU Member States and international organisations~~articipation in the Programme

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0370(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16 – paragraph 2 – introductory wording

2. The ~~Strands~~Programme shall be open to the participation of the following countries: (a) the Member States and their overseas countries and territories listed in Annex II to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, (b) the countries listed below, provided that the conditions are met, including those contained within Directive 2010/13/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 10 March 2010 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the provision of audiovisual media services for the MEDIA strand, and additional appropriations are paid:

2012/10/26
Committee: CULT

2011/0299(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – point 1

(1) contribute to economic growth, social inclusion and the dissemination of information and cultural works and support the development of the Single Market resulting in the improvement of the competitiveness of the European economy, including small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs).

2012/07/05
Committee: CULT

2011/0299(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – point b

(b) the deployment of broadband networks ~~to link island~~and the improvement of collection networks to link island, rural, mountain, transfrontier, landlocked and peripheral regions with the central regions of the Union ensuring in those regions that speeds of data transmission are sufficient to permit broadband connectivity of 30 Mbps and above;

2012/07/05
Committee: CULT

2011/0299(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 3

3. Member States, regional and local authorities and/or other entities in charge of the implementation of projects of common interest or contributing to their implementation shall take the necessary legal, administrative, technical and financial measures in compliance with the corresponding specifications of this Regulation.

2012/07/05
Committee: CULT

2011/0299(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 5

5. Actions contributing to projects of common interest shall be eligible for EU financial support under the conditions and instruments available under the Regulation establishing the Connecting Europe Facility [REF]. Financial support shall be provided in accordance with the relevant rules and procedures adopted by the Union, funding priorities and the availability of resources. This support shall come on top of assistance provided under other Community programmes and initiatives, including the Structural Funds. The Commission shall make sure that measures to support projects of common interest do not act as a disincentive to the implementation of public- and/or private- sector initiatives which are already under way or are being prepared and may not receive funding under other Community and national instruments.

2012/07/05
Committee: CULT

2011/0299(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1

1. The Union may establish contacts, discuss, exchange information and cooperate with public authorities or any other organisations in third countries to achieve any objective pursued by these guidelines where such cooperation gives rise to a European added value. Among other objectives, this cooperation shall seek to promote the interoperability between the trans-European telecommunication networks and telecommunication networks of third countries. This cooperation shall be coordinated with the strategies drawn up in the context of the Union’s external policies, in particular those covered by the European Neighbourhood Instrument, and any macro-regional strategies which are already being implemented or are being prepared.

2012/07/05
Committee: CULT

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 28

(28) Agri-environment-climate payments should continue to play a prominent role in supporting the sustainable development of rural areas and in responding to society's increasing demands for environmental services. They should further encourage farmers and other land managers to serve society as a whole by introducing or continuing to apply agricultural practices contributing to climate change mitigation and adaptation and compatible with the protection and improvement of the environment, the landscape and its features, natural resources, the soil and genetic diversity. In this context the conservation of genetic resources in agriculture and the additional needs of farming systems that are of high nature value should be given specific attention. Payments should contribute to covering additional costs and income foregone resulting from the commitments undertaken and should only cover commitments going beyond relevant mandatory standards and requirements, in accordance with the "polluter pays" principle. In many situations the synergies resulting from commitments undertaken jointly by a group of farmers multiply the environmental and climate benefit. However, joint action brings additional transaction costs which should be compensated adequately. In order to ensure that farmers and other land managers are in a position to correctly implement the commitments they have undertaken, Member States should endeavour to provide them with the required skills and knowledge. Member States should maintain the level of efforts made during the 2007-2013 programming period and have to spend a minimum of 2530% of the total contribution from the EAFRD to each rural development programme for climate change mitigation and adaptation and land management, through the agri- environment-climate, and organic farming payments and payments to areas facing ~~natural or other specific constraints measures~~specific constraints and major natural constraints, notably as a result of arid or wet conditions or soil or terrain quality.

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point j a (new)

(ja) “transition regions”: regions whose gross domestic product (GDP) per capita is between 75% and 90% of the average GDP of the EU-27;

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point t

(t) "short supply chain": a supply chain involving a limited number of economic operators, committed to co-operation, local economic development, and close geographical and social relations between producers, processors and consumers;

2012/07/20
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part

(3) promoting food chain organisation and risk management in agriculture and in rural areas, with a focus on the following areas:

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – introductory part

(5) promoting resource efficiency and supporting the shift towards a low carbon and climate resilient economy in the agriculture, and food ~~and~~sectors, in rural areas and in the forestry sectors, with a focus on the following areas:

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point a

(a) promoting irrigation and access to water and increasing efficiency in water use by agriculture;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 6 – point a

(a) facilitating diversification, creation and transfer of ownership of new small enterprises and job creation;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c

(c) mountain areas and areas facing natural constraints, as referred to in Article 33(2) and (3) respectively;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 8 – paragraph 3

3. The support rates laid down in Annex I may be increased by 10 percentage points for operations supported in the framework of thematic sub-programmes concerning small farms and short supply chains. In the case of young farmers ~~and mountain areas~~, mountain areas and areas facing natural constraints, such as those referred to in Article 32(2) and (3), the maximum support rates may be increased in accordance with Annex I. However, the maximum combined support rate shall not exceed 90%.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point m

(m) ~~information on the complementarity~~the mechanisms for coordination with measures financed by the other common agricultural policy instruments, through cohesion policy or by the EMFF;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Seán KELLY, Jim HIGGINS, Piotr BORYS, Joachim ZELLER, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part

(a) business start-up and transfer aid for:

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 21 – paragraph 1 – point d

(d) investments in the setting-up, improvement or expansion of local basic services for the rural population, including sport, leisure and culture, and the related infrastructure;

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

~~In order to be~~3. Member States shall designate areas, other than mountain areas, facing significant natural constraints, as eligible for payments under Article 32~~, areas, other than mountain~~. These areas, shall be c~~onsidered as facing~~haracterised by significant natural constraints if at least 66% of the UAA meets at least one of the criteria listed in Annex II at the threshold value indicated. Respect of this condition shall be ensured at the appropriate level of local administrative units ("LAU 2" level)resulting in particular from arid or wet conditions or from soil or terrain quality, and by the fact that maintaining extensive farming activity is important for the management of the land. Indicative biophysical criteria for the delimitation of areas facing significant natural constraints are listed in Annex II.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

When delimiting the areas concerned by this paragraph, Member States shall undertake a fine-tuning exercise, based on objective criteria, with the purpose of excluding areas in which significant natural constraints in accordance with the first subparagraph have been documented but have been overcome by investments or by economic activity.deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point a a (new)

(aa) 75% of eligible expenditure in transition regions;

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0282(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 65 – paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. At least 30 % of the total EAFRD contribution to the rural development programme shall be reserved for the measures referred to in Articles 29, 30, 31 and 32.

2012/07/26
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 82 a (new)

(82a) For economic, social and environmental reasons, in the interests of heritage conservation, in the light of regional planning policy in rural areas with a wine-producing tradition, and going beyond the requirement to uphold the diversity, prestige and quality of European wine products, the present system of planting rights in the wine sector should be continued.

2012/07/19
Committee: AGRI

2011/0281(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 163 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2 – point c – point ii

(ii) the transitional planting right regime set out in Subsection II of Section V of Chapter III of Title I of Part II, until 31 December 2015, or, to the extent necessary in order to give effect to any decision taken by Member States under Article 89(5), until 31 December 2018;deleted

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 32 – paragraph 1

1. Farmers shall ensure that at least 73.5 % of their eligible hectares as defined in Article 25(2), excluding areas under permanent grassland, is ecological focus area such as land left fallow, terraces, landscape features, buffer strips and afforested areas as referred to in article 25(2)(b)(ii).

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 1

1. ~~Member States may grant a payment~~A payment shall be granted to farmers entitled to a payment under the basic payment scheme referred to in Chapter 1 and whose holdings are fully or partly situated in areas with natural constraints designated by Member States in accordance with Article 33(1) of Regulation (EU) No […] [RDR].

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 2

2. Member States ~~may decide to~~shall grant the payment referred to in paragraph 1 to all areas falling within the scope of that paragraph or, alternatively, and on the basis of objective and non-discriminatory criteria, to restrict the payment to some of the areas referred to in Article 33(1) of Regulation (EU) No […] [RDR].

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 3

3. Without prejudice to paragraph 2 and to the application of financial discipline, progressive reduction and capping, linear reduction as referred in Article 7, and any reductions and exclusions imposed pursuant to Article 65 of Regulation (EU) No […] [HZR], the payment referred to in paragraph 1 shall be granted annually per eligible hectare situated in the areas to which Member States ~~decided to~~ grant a payment in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article and shall be paid upon activation of payment entitlements on those hectares held by the farmer concerned.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 4

4. The payment per hectare referred to in paragraph 1 shall be calculated by dividing the amount resulting from the application of Article 35 by the number of eligible hectares declared according to Article 26(1) which are situated in the areas to which Member States ~~decided to~~ grant a payment in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1

Member States ~~may~~shall apply the payment referred to in this Chapter at regional level under the conditions laid down in this paragraph.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 34 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 4

The payment at regional level shall be calculated by dividing the regional ceiling calculated in accordance with the third subparagraph by the number of eligible hectares declared according to Article 26(1) which are situated in the areas to which Member States ~~decided to~~ grant a payment in accordance with paragraph 2 of this Article.

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 39 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1, Member States may decide to use up to 105 % of the annual national ceiling set out in Annex II provided that:

2012/07/24
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a

(a) an amount not exceeding 1520 % of the national average payment per beneficiary;

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0280(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 49 – paragraph 2

2. 2. The amount referred to in paragraph 1 shall not be lower than EUR 500 and not be higher than EUR 1 0500. Without prejudice to Article 51(1), where the application of paragraph 1 results in an amount lower than EUR 500 or higher than EUR 1 0500, the amount shall be rounded up or down, respectively, to the minimum or maximum amount.

2012/07/25
Committee: AGRI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 9

(9) For the Partnership Contract and each programme respectively, a Member State should organise a partnership with the representatives of competent regional, local, urban and other public authorities, public and private economic and social partners, and bodies representing civil society, including environmental partners, partners active in various fields such as culture, education and youth, non- governmental organisations, and bodies responsible for promoting equality and non-discrimination. The purpose of such a partnership is to respect the principle of multi-level governance, ensure the ownership of planned interventions by stakeholders and build on the experience and know-how of relevant actors. The Commission should be empowered to adopt delegated acts providing for a code of conduct in order to ensure that partners are involved in the preparation, implementation, monitoring and evaluation of Partnership Contracts and programmes in a consistent manner.

2012/05/14
Committee: CULT

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point 1

(1) strengthening research, technological development, the cultural and creative industries and innovation;

2012/05/14
Committee: CULT

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point 6

6) protecting the environment and the natural and cultural heritage and promoting resource efficiency;

2012/05/14
Committee: CULT

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point 9

9) promoting social inclusion, sport and tourism and combating poverty;

2012/05/14
Committee: CULT

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – Article 9 – paragraph 1 – point 10

10) investing in education, culture, skills and lifelong learning, including vocational training;

2012/05/14
Committee: CULT

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – Article 28 – paragraph 1 – point b

b) community-led, by local action groups composed of representatives of public and private local cultural and socio-economic interests, where at the decision-making level neither the public sector nor any single interest group shall represent more than 49 % of the voting rights;

2012/05/14
Committee: CULT

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – Article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1

The monitoring committee shall be composed of representatives of the managing authority and intermediate bodies and of representatives of the partners referred to in Article 5. Each member of the monitoring committee shall have a voting right.

2012/05/14
Committee: CULT

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 15

(15) The Common Strategic Framework should therefore establish the key areas of support, territorial challenges to be addressed, policy objectives, priority areas for cooperation activities, coordination mechanisms and mechanisms for coherence and consistency with the economic policies of Member States and the Union and with macro regional strategies and sea basins strategies, where Member States and regions participate in such strategies.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17

(17) Member States should concentrate support to ensure a significant contribution to the achievement of Union objectives in line with their specific national and regional development needs. Ex ante conditionalities should be defined to ensure that the necessary framework conditions for the effective use of Union support are in place. The ~~fulfilment of tho~~se ex ante conditionalities sh~~ould be assessed by the Commission~~all apply only to the extent that they are directly linked to the implementation of the Funds. The European Commission shall assess the information provided by the Member States on the application of the ex ante conditionalities in the framework of its assessment of the Partnership Contract and programmes. In cases where there is a failure to fulfil an ex ante conditionality, the Commission should have the power to suspend payments to the programme.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 8 a (new)

Article 8a Macro regional strategies and sea basins strategies The CSF Funds shall contribute to macro regional strategies and sea basins strategies, where Member States and regions participate in such strategies. The Commission and the Member States concerned shall ensure the Funds' coordination with these strategies at the level of the Common Strategic Framework, of Partnership Contracts and of operational programmes in order to ensure sufficient allocation from the Funds to these strategies.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 12

Article 12 Adoption and review The Commission shall be empowered to adopt a delegated act in accordance with Article 142 on the Common Strategic Framework within 3 months of the adoption of this Regulation. Where there are major changes in the Union strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive growth, the Commission shall review and, where appropriate, adopt, by delegated act in accordance with Article 142, a revised Common Strategic Framework. Within 6 months of adoption of a revised Common Strategic Framework, Member States shall propose amendments, where necessary, to their Partnership Contract and programmes to ensure their consistency with the revised Common Strategic Framework.deleted

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a – point v

(v) the main priority areas for cooperation~~, taking account, where appropriate, of macro-regional and sea basin strategies~~;

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a – point vii bis (new)

vii a) the means of coordinating programmes focused on Article 14 (a(vii)) with programmes working towards the objective of European Regional Cooperation.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)

(a a) arrangements to ensure alignment with macro regional and sea basins strategies, where Member States and regions participate in such strategies, in order to ensure sufficient allocation from the Funds to these strategies;

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX, Maurice PONGA, Michel DANTIN

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 14 – paragraph 1 – point b – point ii

ii) the arrangements to ensure an integrated approach to the use of the CSF Funds for the territorial development of urban, rural, coastal, mountainous and cross-border, and fisheries areas and areas with particular territorial features, in particular the implementation arrangements for Articles 28, 29 and 99 accompanied, where appropriate, by a list of the cities to participate in the urban development platform referred to in Article 8 of the ERDF Regulation;

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 17 – paragraph 2

2. Member States shall assess whether the applicable ex ante conditionalities are fulfilled. Ex ante conditionalities shall be applied only when they have a direct link to the implementation of the Funds.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 20 – paragraph 3

3. Where there is evidence resulting from a performance review that a priority has failed to achieve the milestones set out in the performance framework, the Commission may ~~suspend all or part of an interim pay~~call upon a Member State to propose amendments to the relevant programmes. If the Member State does not respond to this demand or does not respond in a satisfactory manner within three months, the Commission may suspend all or part of the engagements of a priority of a programme in accordance with the procedure laid down in Fund-specific rules.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 23 – paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. The use of multi-fund programmes (ERDF, ESF, cohesion funds, EAFRD, EMFF) is encouraged. In this way the Commission undertakes to allow the preparation and implementation of such programmes with respect to the principle of proportionality.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 24 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Where Member States and regions participate in macro regional strategies or sea basins strategies, the programme shall be coordinated with these strategies, in accordance with the Partnership Contract, in order to ensure sufficient allocation from the Funds to these strategies.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 24 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 – point c a (new)

(c a) where appropriate, indicators related to the programme's contribution to macro regional strategies and sea basins strategies.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 42 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

The monitoring committee of a programme under the European territorial cooperation goal shall also include representatives of any third country participating in that programme and may include representatives of the EGTC or other territorial cooperation organisations located in the territories affected by the programme.

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Part 2 – article 60 – paragraph 2 – point b

b) the total amount allocated under the programme to operations located outside the programme area is not less than 1 % but does not exceed 10 % of the support from the ERDF, Cohesion Fund and EMFF at the level of the priority, or 3 % of the support from the EAFRD at the level of the programme. These amounts may be allocated to the actions referred to in Article 87(2)(c) (v and vi);

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 83 – paragraph 2

2. The Commission shall adopt a decision, by means of implementing acts, setting out the annual breakdown of the global resources by Member State, for the ‘Investing in growth and jobs’ goal without prejudice to paragraph 3 of this Article and Article 84(7) and by means of the cooperation programme for the European territorial cooperation goal.

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 84 – paragraph 8

Resources for the European territorial cooperation goal shall amount to ~~3,48~~7 % of the global resources available for budgetary commitment from the Funds for the period 2014 to 2020 (i.e., a total of EUR ~~11 700 000 004~~XXX).

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 87 – paragraph 1

1. An operational programme shall consist of priority axes. AIn duly motivated circumstances, a priority axis ~~shall~~may concern one ~~Fund for a~~or more categoryies of region and shall correspond, without prejudice to Article 52, to a thematic objective and comprise one or more investment priorities of that thematic objective, in accordance with the Fund-specific rules. For the ESF, a priority axis may combine investment priorities from different thematic objectives set out in Article 9(8), (9), (10) and (11) in order to facilitate their contribution to other priority axes, in duly justified circumstanc, or combine one or more complementary investment priorities from different thematic objectives and Funds, in accordance with Fund-specific rules.

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 87 – paragraph 2 – point a – point ii bis (new)

ii a) A presentation of the procedures for coordinating between the Investment for growth and jobs operational programmes, the programmes from the European territorial cooperation goal, and the programmes from the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund (EMFF), the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI), the European Development Fund (EDF), and the Pre- Accession Instrument (IPA) for the regions concerned.

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 87 – paragraph 2 – point c – point v

(v) the arrangements for cross-border, interregional and transnational actions with beneficiaries located in at least one other Member State;

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 95 – paragraph 1 – point 1

(1) an analysis of the development needs and objectives justifying the joint action plan, taking into account the objectives of the operational programmes, of macro regional strategies and sea basins strategies where they have a significant impact, and, where applicable, the country-specific recommendations and the broad guidelines of the economic policies of the Member States and of the Union under Article 121(2) and the Council recommendations which the Member States shall take into account in their employment policies under Article 148(4) of the Treaty;

2012/06/06
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 101 – paragraph 3 – point c

(c) where appropriate, progress in implementation of ~~any~~macro regional strategies and sea basins strategies and of any other interregional and transnational actions;

2012/06/06
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 110 – paragraph 2 bis (new)

2a. For programmes under the European Territorial Cooperation objective, the Commission’s decisions listed in Paragraphs 1 and 2 are carried out under an operational programme and not for each priority axis.

2012/06/06
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 110 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

The co-financing rate ~~at the level of each priority axis~~ of operational programmes under the European territorial cooperation goal shall be no higher than 75 %.

2012/06/06
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Part 3 – article 110 – paragraph 4

4. The co-financing rate of the additional allocation in accordance with Article 84(1)(e) shall be no higher than 50%. The same co-financing rate shall apply to the additional allocation under Article 4(2) of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [ETC Regulation].deleted

2012/06/06
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.6 – Paragraph 1.6.2

1.6.2 In this context, the Funds covered by the CPR make it possible to combine the power of different EU funds into integrated packages which are tailor- made to fit local, territorial and regional specific needs.

2012/06/08
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.6 – Paragraph 1.6.3

1.6.3 When developing their strategies and programmes with a view to identifying the most appropriate interventions, Member States and regions must pay particular attention to predominant territorial, structural and institutional features, such as connectivity of the region in question, employment patterns and labour mobility; rural-urban linkages; cross-border challenges; the local interdependencies between different sectors; cultural heritage; ageing and demographic shifts, etc.

2012/06/08
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex -I (new) – Part 1 – Section 1.6 – Paragraph 1.6.5

1.6.5 So as to foster good policies which are tailored to specific regional needs, Member States and regions must further develop an integrated territorial approach to policy design and delivery, taking account of relevant contextual aspects but focusing on the basis of the following central elements: a) an evaluation of the region's Europe 2020 development potential and capacity; b) an assessment of the development challenges facing the region and its ability to address them; c) an assessment of challenges of cross- border nature. d) consideration of the appropriate territorial scale and context for policy design and delivery, according to the subsidiarity principle; e) design of the multi-level governance arrangements necessary to ensure effective policy delivery; f) the choice of appropriate result and outcome indicators, to be used for policy monitoring and evaluation.

2012/06/08
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex -I (new) – Part 2 – Section 2.2 – Paragraph 2.2.2

2.2.2 In particular, Member States and regions must develop a national or regional research and innovation (R&I) strategy for 'smart specialisation' in line with the National Reform Program. These strategies must be developed through close collaboration between national or regional managing authorities and the authorities directly concerned by Horizon 2020, but also involving stakeholders such as universities and higher education institutions, local industry, SMEs and social partners. Those innovation strategies must take into account both upstream and downstream actions to and from Horizon 2020.

2012/06/08
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex -I (new) – Part 2 – Section 2.6 – Paragraph 2.6.2

2.6.2 Providing for deeper territorial integration, synergies between territorial cooperation activities under cohesion policy and the European Neighbourhood Instruments must be capitalised upon. The potential for creating complementarities between these instruments is strongest with regard to cross border cooperation activities and macro-regional strategies. Member States and regions must, therefore, ensure that existing activities are associated with newly created European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation, having special regard to coordination and exchange of best practices.

2012/06/08
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Annex -I (new) – Part 3 – Paragraph 3.2 – point a

a) identify areas of intervention where the Funds covered by the CPR can be combined in a complementary manner to achieve the thematic objectives set out in this Regulation, taking into consideration cross-border aspects and the situation on the other side of the border;

2012/06/08
Committee: REGI

2011/0276(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Annex -I (new) – Part 4 – Title

4. Priorities for territorial cooperation (cross-border, transnational and interregional)

2012/06/08
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 5

(5) The ERDF should contribute to the Europe 2020 strategy, thus ensuring greater concentration of ERDF support on the priorities of the Union. According to the category of regions supported, the support from the ERDF should be concentrated on research and innovation, information and communication technologies, small and medium-sized enterprises and climate change mitigation. The degree of concentration should take into account the level of development of the region ~~as well as the specific needs of regions whose GDP per capita for the 2007-13 period was less than 75 % of the average GDP of the EU-25 for the reference period~~.

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1

The ERDF shall contribute to the financing of support which aims to reinforce economic, social and territorial cohesion by redressing the main regional imbalances through support for the development and structural adjustment of regional economies, including the conversion of declining industrial regions and regions lagging behind and by taking account of the particular features of regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps such as the northernmost regions with very low population density and island, outermost, cross-border and mountain regions.

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point a

(a) productive investment, which contributes to creating and safeguarding sustainable jobs, through direct aid to investment in small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) primarily;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Joachim ZELLER, Alain CADEC, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 1 – point c

(c) investments in social, health, sport and educational infrastructure;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

~~In more developed regions, the ERDF shall not support investments in infrastructure providing basic services to citizens in the areas of environment, transport, and ICT.~~deleted

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – introductory part

(a) in more developed ~~regions and transition~~ regions:

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a – point i

(i) at least 80 % of the total ERDF resources at national level shall be allocated to the thematic objectives set out in points 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR]~~; and~~

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point a bis (new)

(a a) in transition regions: i) at least 60 % of the total ERDF resources at national level shall be allocated to each of the thematic objectives set in out in points 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Article 9 of Regulation EU No […]/2012 [CPR]; and ii)at least 20 % of the total ERDF resources at national level shall be allocated to each of the thematic objectives set in out in point 4 of Article 9 of Regulation EU No […]/2012 [CPR];

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 1 – point b – point i

(i) at least 50 % of the total ERDF resources at national level shall be allocated to the thematic objectives set out in point 1, 2, 3 and 4 of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR] .

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 2

By derogation from point (a) (i), in those regions whose GDP per capita for the 2007-13 period was less than 75 % of the average GDP of the EU-25 for the reference period but which are eligible under the category of transition or more developed regions as defined in Article 82(2)(b) and (c) of Regulation (EU) No [ ]/2012 [CPR] in the 2014-2020 period, at least 60 % of the total ERDF resources at national level shall be allocated to each of the thematic objectives set in out in points 1, 3 and 4 of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR].deleted

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point b

(b) promoting ~~business~~and supporting business and research centre R&I investment, product and service development, technology transfer, social innovation and public service applications, demand stimulation, networking, clusters and open innovation through smart specialisation;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 1 – point c bis (new)

(c a) developing links and synergies between businesses, research and development centres and higher education

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point b

(b) developing digital and ICT products and services, e-commerce and enhancing demand for ICT;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 2 – point c

(c) strengthening ICT applications for e- government, e-learning, e-inclusion ~~and~~, e- health and online culture;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – introductory part

(3) enhancing the competitiveness of businesses, mainly SMEs:

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point a

(a) promoting entrepreneurship, in particular by facilitating the economic exploitation of new ideas and fostering the creation ~~of new firms~~and the transfer of business ownership;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point a

(a) promoting and supporting the production, transport and distribution of renewable energy sources;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point b

(b) promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy use in businesses, in particular SMEs;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point c

(c) supporting and promoting energy efficiency and renewable energy use in public infrastructure, particularly in public buildings and in the housing sector;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point e

(e) promoting and supporting low-carbon strategies for urban areas;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 4 – point e a (new)

(e a) promoting and supporting research and innovation in low carbon technologies;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 5 – point b

(b) promoting and supporting investment to address specific risks, ensuring disaster resilience and developing disaster management systems;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point b

(b) enhancing regional and local mobility through connecting secondary and tertiary nodes to TEN-T infrastructure;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 7 – point d bis (new)

(d a) developing intermodal transport systems, in particular maritime and inland waterway transport and assisting ports and airports in promoting sustainable development;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

(a) development of business incubators and investment support for self-employment and micro-enterprises and business creation;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 8 – point a

(a) development of business incubators and investment support for self-employment and business creation and the transfer of business ownership;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Joachim ZELLER, Alain CADEC, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 5 – paragraph 1 – point 9 – point a

(a) investing in health as well as health enhancing physical activity and social infrastructure which contribute to national, regional and local development, reducing inequalities in terms of health status, and transition from institutional to community- based services;

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

At least 50% of the specific additional allocation shall be allocated to actions contributing to the diversification and modernisation of the economies of the outermost regions, with a particular focus on the thematic objectives set out in points 1, 2 and 3 of Article 9 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR]rticle 4 does not apply to the specific additional allocation.

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0275(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. All enterprises established in the outermost regions may benefit from the specific additional allocation and, by way of derogation from Article 3(1)(a), they may benefit from any productive investment financed under the ERDF.

2012/06/07
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 1

(1) Article 176 of the Treaty provides that the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) is intended to help to redress the main regional imbalances in the Union. In accordance with Article 174 of the Treaty, the ERDF contributes to reducing disparities between the levels of development of the various regions and the backwardness of the least favoured regions, among which particular attention should be paid to rural areas, areas affected by industrial transition, and regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps such as the northernmost regions with very low population density and island, cross-border and mountain regions. In accordance with Article 349 of the Treaty, the outermost regions may benefit from specific measures relating in particular to conditions of access to structural funds and to horizontal Union programmes.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 13

(13) For the benefit of the regions of the Union, a mechanism to organise support from the ERDF to external policy instruments such as ENI, EDF and IPA should be set up, including where external cooperation programmes cannot be adopted or have to be discontinued.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 20

(20) Based on the experience from the 2007-13 programming period, the conditions for the selection of operations shoul d be clarified and strengthened in order to ensure selection of only genuinely joint operations. Furthermore, an adapted approach should take into consideration the specific context of cooperation with third countries. The notion of sole beneficiaries should be defined and it should be clarified that they are permitted to carry out cooperation operations by themselves.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27

(27) The rules on flexibility concerning the location of operations out side the programme area should be simplified. In addition, it is necessary to support and facilitate, through specific arrangements, effective cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation with the Union's neighbouring third countries where this is necessary to ensure that the regions of the Member States which border third countries can be effectively assisted in their development. Accordingly, it is appropriate to authorise on an exceptional basis and under certain conditions the financing of assistance from the ERDF for operations located on the territory of third countries where the operations are for the benefit of the regions of the Union.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 31

~~(31)~~ A single audit authority should be responsible for carrying out all functions listed in Article 116 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR] in order to ensure uniform standards across the whole programme area. Where this is not possible, a group of auditors or specific arrangements in the event of cooperation between the outermost regions and third countries should be able to assist the programme audit authority.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 35

(35) It is necessary to clarify the applicable rules concerning financial management, programming, monitoring, evaluation and control regarding the participation of third countries in cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation programmes, particulary when outermost regions are involved. Those rules should be established in the relevant cooperation programme and/or the relevant financing agreement between the Commission, each of the third countries and the Member State hosting the managing authority of the relevant cooperation programme.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 12

(12) It is necessary to continue supporting or – where needed – to establish cross- border, transnational and interregional cooperation with the Union's neighbouring third countries, as this will benefit the regions of the Member States which border third countries. To that effect, the ERDF will contribute to the cross-border and sea basin programmes established under the European Neighbourhood Instrument (ENI) pursuant to Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 and the Instrument for Pre- Accession (IPA) pursuant to Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 . Where there is a clear benefit for a cooperation project supported under inter regional cooperation, regions from other third countries may also be involved.

2013/06/24
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point b

b) exchange of experience concerning the identification, transfer and dissemination of good practice on sustainable urban and rural development and the consideration of particular territorial features including permanent natural and geographical handicaps, as referred to in Article 174 TFEU;

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1 – point 3 – point c

c) exchange of experience concerning the identification, transfer and dissemination of good practice and innovative approaches in relation to actions and the implementation of programmes concerning territorial cooperation and to the use of EGTCs;

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Without prejudice to Article 19(2) and (3), cross-border cooperation programmes may cover regions from Norway, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Andorra, Monaco and San Marino and third countries or territories neighbouring outermost regions. The abovementioned countries must contribute to the programme(s) they take part in. This contribution is included in the financing plan referred to in Article 7, paragraph 2, point f). For third countries or territories neighbouring outermost regions, this contribution is optional and is not a requirement for their participation.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

For transnational cooperation, the Commission shall adopt the list of transnational areas to receive support, broken down by cooperation programme and covering NUTS level 2 regions while ensuring the continuity of such cooperation in larger coherent areas based on previous programmes, by means of implementing acts, taking account of macro-regional strategies and sea-basins already existing and being drawn up. Those implementing acts shall be adopted in accordance with the advisory procedure referred to in Article 30(2).

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 4 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

Population in the areas referred to in the 3rd sub-paragraph of Ar ticle 3(1) and the first sub-paragraph of Article (3)(3) shall be used as the criterion for the ~~annual~~ breakdown by ~~Member Stat~~cooperation programme.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – introductory part

In addition to Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [the ERDF Regulation], the ERDF shall support ~~the sharing of human resources~~investment in equipment, facilities ~~and~~, infrastructures and the sharing of human resources, across borders under the different investment priorities, as well as the following investment priorities within the thematic objectives:

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iii

iii) developing and implementing joint education, learning and training schemes (within the thematic objective of investing in skills, education and lifelong learning);

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv a (new)

iv a) cooperation between businesses, particularly between SMEs in order to support the sustainable development of these businesses through forms of economic, commercial or technological cooperation, mobility or exchanges, the creation of enterprise centres and cluster networking (within the thematic objective on strengthening the competitiveness of SMEs)

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv b (new)

iv b) drawing-up and implementing macro-regional strategies and sea basin strategies (within all thematic objectives).

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iv c (new)

iv c) investment in health and social infrastructures as well as the cooperation systems of emergency services which contribute to an effective use resources in cross-border regions (within the thematic objective of promoting social inclusion and combatting poverty).

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 1 – point b

b) under transnational cooperation: development and implementation of macro-regional and sea-basin strategies (within ~~the~~all thematic objective ~~of enhancing institutional capacity and an efficient public administration~~s).

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point b – point ii

ii) the common and specific output and result indicators, with where appropriate a baseline value and a quantified target value, in accordance with ~~Fund-specific rules~~Article 15;

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c – point ii

ii) where appropriate, a planned inte grated approach to the territorial development of urban, rural, mountain, coastal areas and areas with particular territorial features, in particular the implementation arrangements for Articles 28 and 29 of Regulation (EU) No./2012 [CPR];

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c – point v

v) wfor the re ~~appropriate~~levant programmes, the contribution of the planned interventions towards macro regional strategies and sea basin strategies;

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point c – point v a (new)

v a) priority structural projects identified within the framework of macro regional strategies and sea basin strategies.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point f – point ii

ii) a table specifying, for the whole programming period, for the cooperation programme ~~and for each priority axis~~, the amount of the total financial appropriation of the support from the ERDF and the national co-financing. The table shall give the indicative breakdown between the priority axes. Where the national co-financing is made up of public and private co-financing, the table shall give the indicative breakdown between the public and the private components. It shall show, for information purposes, any contribution from third countries participating in the programme and the envisaged participation from the EIB;

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 2 – point g – point i

i) identification of the accreditation body, the managing authority ~~and the audit~~, the audit authority and, where appropriate, the certifying authority;.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

~~Member States shall submit an opinion of the national equality bodies on the measures set out in points (ii) and (iii) with the proposal for a cooperation programme.~~deleted

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 11 – paragraph 4

4. Beneficiaries shall cooperate in the development, implementation, staffing and financing of operations. For programmes involving outermost regions and third countries, a minimum of two of these conditions may be verified.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 1

1. By 30 ~~April~~June 2016 and by 30 ~~April~~June of each subsequent year until and including 2022, the managing authority shall submit to the Commission an annual report in accordance with Article 44(1) of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR]. The report submitted in 2016 shall cover the financial years 2014 and 2015, as well as the period between the starting date for eligibility of expenditure and 31 December 2013.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 13 – paragraph 3 – point d

d) where appropriate, the specific actions taken to promote equality between men and women and to prevent discrimination, including accessibility for disabled persons, and the arrangements implemented to ensure the integration of the gender perspective in the operational programme and operations;

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 16

The amount of the ERDF allocated to technical assistance shall be limited to 6% of the total amount allocated to a cooperation programmes~~, but shall not be~~. For programmes facing specific implementation difficulties, the Commission may authorise, on a reasoned request, that the ERDF amount allocated to technical assistance shall be limited to 8 % of the total amount allocated to cooperation programmes. For programmes where the ERDF budget is less than EUR ~~1 5~~50 000 000, the amount of technical assistance shall be negotiated between the Member States, the third countries concerned and the Commission.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 1

1. The Commission shall be empowered to adopt delegated acts in accordance with Article 29 to set additional specific rules on eligibility of expenditure for cooperation programmes. To that end, the Commission shall set out the specific provisions concerning the application of rules on state aid in the context of cooperation programmes.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 2

2. Without prejudice to the eligibility rules laid down in or on the basis of Articles 55 to 61 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR], Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [ERDF] or, this Regulation or on the basis thereof, the monitoring committee shall establish eligibility rules for the cooperation programme as a whole.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3

3. For matters not covered by eligibility rules laid down in or on the basis of Articles 55 to 61 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR], Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [ERDF] or this Regulation or by the monitoring committee, the national rules of the ~~country in which~~Member State of the beneficiary who incurred the expenditure ~~is incurred~~ shall apply.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 17 – paragraph 3

3. For matters not covered by eligibility rules laid down in or on the basis of Articles 55 to 61 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR], Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [ERDF] or, this Regulation or on the basis thereof or by the monitoring committee, the national rules of the country in which the expenditure is incurred shall apply.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 1

1. Operations under cooperation programmes, subject to the derogations referred to in paragraphs 2 ~~and 3~~, shall be located in the ~~part of the~~ programme area ~~comprising Union territory (the 'Union part of the programme area')~~.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – introductory part

2. The managing authority may accept that all or part of an operation is implemented outside the ~~Union part of the~~ programme area, provided that all the following conditions are satisfied:

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 2 – point b

b) the total amount allocated under the cooperation programme to operations located outside the Union part programme area does not exceed 20 % of the support from the ERDF at programme level, or 30 % in the case of cooperation programmes for which the Union part of the programme consists of outermost regions;deleted

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 19 – paragraph 3

b) the total amount allocated under the cooperation programme to operations located outside the Union part programme area does not exceed 20 % of the support from the ERDF at programme level, or 30 % in the case of cooperation programmes for which the Union part of the programme consists of outermost regions;deleted

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 20 – paragraph 1

1. For the purposes of Articles 113(1) and (2 ) of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR], Member States participating in a cooperation programme shall appoint a single managing authority, for the purposes of Article 113(2) of that regulation, a certifying authority, and, for the purpose of Article 113(4) of that Regulation, a single audit authority~~, which shall be situated in the same Member Stat~~. The managing authority and the audit authority shall be situated in the same Member State. Member States participating in a cooperation programme may allocate a single managing authority which will also act as a certifying authority. Allocations shall be made without prejudice to the sharing of responsibilities between the Member State participating in that programme in relation to the application of financial corrections as set out by the cooperation programme.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 1

1. The managing authority of a cooperation programme shall carry out the functions of the managing authority ~~and of the certifying authority~~ laid down in Articles 114 ~~and 115~~ of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR].

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 – paragraph 4 – subparagraph 2

Those controllers shall, where possible, be the same bodies responsible for carrying out such verifications for the operational programmes under the Investment for growth and jobs goal or, in the case of third countries, for carrying out comparable verifications under external pol icy instruments of the Union.deleted

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 22 a (new)

Article 22 a Functions of the certifying authority The certifying authority of a cooperation programme shall assume the functions defined in Article 115 of Regulation (EU) No […]/2012 [CPR]. When a managing authority has been allocated it shall assume the functions defined under Articles 114 and 115 of that Regulation.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0273(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 28

Detailed rules concerning financial management as well as programming, monitoring, evaluation and control of the participation of third countries in cross- border, transnational and interregional cooperation programmes as referred to in Article 3(4), second sub-paragraph, and (5) shall be established in the relevant cooperation program me and/or the relevant financing agreement between the Commission, each of the third countries and the Member State hosting the managing authority of the relevant cooperation programme, as appropriate.

2012/06/04
Committee: REGI

2011/0268(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3

3. The ESF shall benefit people, including disadvantaged groups such as the long- term unemployed, people with disabilities, migrants, ethnic minorities, marginalised communities and people facing social exclusion. The ESF shall also provide support to enterprises, systems and structures with a view to facilitating their adaptation to new challenges and promoting good governance and the implementation of reforms, in particular in the fields of employment, education, training and social policies.

2012/05/14
Committee: CULT

2011/0268(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point iii

iii) Self-employment, entrepreneurship and ~~business creation~~the creation, ongoing development and transfer of businesses, particularly for micro and small enterprises;

2012/05/14
Committee: CULT

2011/0268(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b – introductory part

(b) Investing in education, vocational training and apprenticeships, skills and life- long learning through:

2012/05/14
Committee: CULT

2011/0268(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii

(iii) Enhancing access to lifelong learning, upgrading the skills, knowledge, qualifications and competences of the workforce and increasing the labour market relevance of education and training systems;

2012/05/14
Committee: CULT

2011/0268(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 2 – point c

(c) Strengthening research, technological development and innovation, through the development of post-graduate studies and entrepreneurial skills, the training of researchers, networking activities and partnerships between higher education institutions, research and technological centres and enterprises;

2012/05/14
Committee: CULT

2011/0268(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 1

1. The ESF shall promote high levels of employment and job quality, support the geographical and occupational mobility of workers, and facilitate ~~thei~~worker adaptation to change~~, encourage a high level of e~~s to the businesses and producation ~~and training, promote gender equality, equal opportunities and non- discrimination, enhance~~systems. The ESF will also contribute to the strengthening of economic, social and territorial cohesion in the Union, the fight against poverty and social inexclusion ~~and combat poverty, thereby contributing to the priorities of the European Union as regards strengthening economic, social and territorial cohes~~, promote gender equality, equal opportunities and elimination of any form of discrimination.

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0268(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 2 – paragraph 3

3. The ESF shall benefit people, including disadvantaged groups such as the long- term unemployed, people with disabilities, migrants, ethnic minorities, marginalised communities and people facing social exclusion. The ESF shall also provide support to workers, enterprises, and entrepreneurs as well as systems and structures with a view to facilitating their adaptation to new challenges and promoting good governance and the implementation of reforms, in particular in the fields of employment, education and social policies.

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0268(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point v

(v) Adaptation of workers, enterprises and entrepreneurs to change, specifically in SMEs and micro-enterprises;

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0268(COD)

Joachim ZELLER, Alain CADEC, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point a – point vi

(vi) Active and healthy ageing; as well as physical activity

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0268(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point b – point iii a (new)

(iii a) Better and fairer access to contracts by professional groups and countries in order to be closer to real needs;

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0268(COD)

Joachim ZELLER, Alain CADEC, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a regulation
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point c – point iv

(iv) Enhancing access to affordable, sustainable and high-quality services, including health care, health enhancing physical activity programmes of non- profit organisations and social services of general interest;

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0268(COD)

Alain CADEC, Brice HORTEFEUX, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Elisabeth MORIN-CHARTIER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 6 – paragraph 3

3. To encourage adequate participation of and access by non-governmental organisations to actions supported by the ESF, particularly with measures of impact, notably in the fields of social inclusion, gender equality and equal opportunities, the managing authorities of an operational programme in a region as defined in Article 82(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No […] or in Member States eligible for Cohesion Fund support shall ensure that an appropriate amount of ESF resources is allocated to capacity-building for non-governmental organisations.

2012/06/05
Committee: REGI

2011/0187(COD)

Sabine VERHEYEN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Hans-Peter MAYER

Proposal for a regulation
Recital 70 a (new)

(70a) Concerning border regions, mobile operators should provide their customers with better information on how to avoid inadvertent roaming charges.

2011/12/21
Committee: ITRE

2011/0187(COD)

Sabine VERHEYEN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Hans-Peter MAYER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 14 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1 a (new)

Home providers shall provide all users with full information on how to avoid inadvertent roaming charges.

2011/12/21
Committee: ITRE

2011/0187(COD)

Sabine VERHEYEN, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Hans-Peter MAYER

Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

Where appropriate, home providers shall inform their customers, before the conclusion of a contract and on a regular basis thereafter, of the risk of automatic and uncontrolled data roaming connection and download. Furthermore, home providers shall explain to their customers, in a clear and easily understandable manner, how to switch off these automatic data roaming connections in order to avoid uncontrolled consumption of data roaming services and inadvertent roaming in border regions.

2011/12/21
Committee: ITRE

2011/0177(APP)

Draft opinion
Recital B

B. whereas learning mobility in the field of education, training and youth is essential for creating and safeguarding jobs and reducing poverty and has direct impact on both Europe’s short-term economic recovery and its longer-term growth and productivity, and the exchanges facilitated by this means help to develop citizens’ active participation in European integration and cohesion;

2012/07/19
Committee: CULT

2011/0177(APP)

Draft opinion
Recommendation viii a (new)

(viiia) Notes that the Commission proposal does not cover all the target beneficiaries and actions included under the current programmes: for example, there would no longer be a separate budget heading for adult mobility; also notes, with regard to higher education, that the Commission’s plan to exclude Erasmus Mundus doctoral students from the scope of the Erasmus For All programme and transfer the funding to support their mobility to the Horizon 2020 programme needs to be very closely monitored, as this plan could help weaken the link between research and higher education (the necessity for which is continually restated by the Bologna Process) and jeopardise the establishment strategies facilitated over the last three years by the existing Erasmus Mundus programme, and could also fail to take the educational aspect of Erasmus Mundus doctorates into account, and restrict them to applied research;

2012/07/19
Committee: CULT

2011/0177(APP)

Draft opinion
Recommendation x

(x) Points out the alarming level of youth unemployment and notes with concern that youth policy is not sufficiently visible in the Commission proposal; stresses the need to create a separate chapter with its own budget heading;

2012/07/19
Committee: CULT

2011/0177(APP)

Draft opinion
Recommendation xvii

(xvii) Recalls that the investment from the European Social Fund and European Regional Development Fund should represented more than EUR 72 billion for education and training and EUR 60 billion for research and innovation during 2007- 2013; therefore stresses the importance of maximising synergies and multiplier effects between different parts of the budget, in particular between structural policies, on the one hand, and education, training, youth and culture policies, on the other; calls for care to be taken to ensure that learning mobility for adults (including workers and adult learners) is eligible for funding under the Structural Funds and that such funding is easier to access;

2012/07/19
Committee: CULT

2010/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas education is fundamental to fostering young people’s creativity and innovative potential; whereas education gives people the necessary tools to develop intellectually ~~and socially~~, enter the labour market, develop as a person and take up their social and civic role,

2011/03/17
Committee: CULT

2010/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Points out that investing in education is without a doubt essential for any sustainable growth and development and that, even in times of economic crisis, financing youth and education should not be considered as a cost in the present time but as an investment in the future of Europe;(Does not affect English version.)

2011/03/17
Committee: CULT

2010/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission to continue investing in the mobility and youth programmes such as Lifelong Learning (Erasmus, Leonardo da Vinci, Comenius, Grundtvig), Marie Curie, Erasmus Mundus and Youth in Action; calls for these programmes to be promoted more effectively and for their target population groups to be made more aware of the opportunities they provide;

2011/03/17
Committee: CULT

2010/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls on the Commission to collect data at national ~~and~~, regional and local levels on the practical barriers to mobility, and to take steps to remove them to ensure high- quality mobility that is accessible to all;

2011/03/17
Committee: CULT

2010/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls on national, regional, and local authorities to support and enhance cooperation between universities and business with a view to ensuring better coordination between the three corners of the knowledge triangle, namely research, education and innovation;

2011/03/17
Committee: CULT

2010/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19 a (new)

19a. Emphasises the importance of the research and innovation funding programmes existing under the Framework Programme for Research and Development and cohesion policy, and of ensuring better coordination with education measures; considers, furthermore, that cross-border cooperation is essential to the success of the YoM scheme; calls accordingly on the stakeholders to make full use of the opportunities available under the cohesion policy’s Territorial Cooperation Objective;

2011/03/17
Committee: CULT

2010/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Encourages universities to bring their programmes and structures closer to the specific needs of the labour market and to explore new methods of cooperation with private and public companies by encouraging the creation of public-private partnerships (PPPs) and sponsorships;

2011/03/17
Committee: CULT

2010/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23

23. Stresses the importance of supporting mobility in the field of VET by providing VET students with information, counselling, guidance and hosting structures when they are abroad; lays particular emphasis on the need to set up partnerships with learning centres and business organisations with a view to guaranteeing the availability of high- quality mobility opportunities and making them an integral part of learning pathways;

2011/03/17
Committee: CULT

2010/2307(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Calls on the Member States to ensure that all young people, whatever their status, enjoy the same basic advantages, in particular as regards health cover, housing and access to culture;

2011/03/17
Committee: CULT

2010/2307(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Strongly supports the EU target for 40% of young people to ~~complete tertiary (i.e. higher and vocational) edu~~obtain an educational qualification or an equivalent qualification;

2011/03/17
Committee: CULT

2010/2305(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas absorption capacity is the extent to which a Member State is able to spend the financial resources allocated from the Structural and Cohesion Funds in an effective and efficient manner, and whereas this capacity is necessary for making a maximum contribution to economic ~~and soc~~, social and territorial cohesion with the resources available from the EU funds,

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA

Motion for a resolution
Recital B

B. whereas absorption capacity is not a parameter but a variable and whereas it differs widely in the different Member States and regions, so that individual solutions are necessary to increase this capacity,

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas aiming at absorbing as much financial support as possible requires continuous efforts by the Member States and management authorities and the involvement of the local and regional level of administration in every stage of the process,

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas the Member States that joined the EU in the current programming period in particular are facing substantial difficulties as regards absorption resulting from the significant increase in the amount of the funds available in comparison with the pre -accession funds and the shortcomings of the administrative structures for setting up, supporting and evaluating projects,

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the lack of visibility regarding the levels of uptake of short- and medium-term funds is an obstacle to absorption capacity, and whereas better transparency is needed at all levels of governance,

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 – point 6

over-complicated and over-strict national ~~requirement~~procedures, and frequent changes therein;

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Reiterates the need for simplification of rules and procedures at both EU and national level without creating major difficulties for the beneficiaries; believes that simplification will contribute to the speedy allocation of funds, higher absorption rates, increased efficiency, fewer errors and reduced payment periods; considers that a balance needs to be struck between simplification and the stability of rules ~~and~~, procedures and controls;

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Stresses that the coordination of audit activities should be improved and calls, to that end, for redundant controls to be removed in Member States which have an adequate fund management system; considers that the single audit principle should be applied in the next programming period and that, as with the ‘contract of confidence’ principle, it should be implemented as often as possible;

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Highlight~~Stresses the ~~benef~~merits of ~~synergies between ERDF, ESF a~~greater synergy and complementarity between all the shared management funds (ERDF, ESF, cohesion fund, EAFRD and EFF); takes the view that flexibility ~~to support ESF- type of actions in ERDF programmes should be increased, and~~between the ERDF and the ESF should be encouraged so as to facilitate the financing of integrated projects, while taking into account the specific nature and objectives of each of these funds; stresses that harmonisation of rules and procedures would lead to simplified delivery systems and encourage participation by potential beneficiaries in EU co-funded programmes; recalls in this context the potential of cross-financing, which is not yet being fully exploited;

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls on the Member States ~~to make further efforts to attract and retain~~ and the Commission, in coordination with local and regional authorities, to promote the training of high-quali~~fied~~ty staff to manage EU funds;

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls on the Member States to make further efforts to attract, train and retain qualified staff to manage EU funds;

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Invites the Member States to establish exchange fora or networks among their implementation structures with a view to discussing experiences and difficulties and exchanging best practices; invites the Member States also to help beneficiaries address more demanding control requirements by providing them with support, in particular by using technical assistance loans to train and support those economic and social actors that are eligible to benefit from these funds;

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Points out the importance of inter- regional cooperation programmes and of programmes such as INTERACT and URBACT in identifying and disseminating best practices and in training the political and administrative actors in the optimum use of the funds; calls for actions promoting regional planning and effective use of funds to be eligible for appropriations under the ‘inter-regional cooperation’ part of the Territorial Cooperation Objective;

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on the Commission to explore the introduction of harmonised information and communication systems, bearing in mind the differences between the management and control systems of the Member States, and calls, to that end, for the implementation of uniform software to monitor the use of funds in the context of the territorial cooperation programmes;

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Points out that most SMEs, and especially small and micro enterprises, cannot access structural funds on their own due to current administrative and financial constraints, and that they need support and advice from their representative organisations at regional and national level; considers that a simplification of the rules and procedures is essential to ensuring their access to structural funds; calls for the Small Business Act, its ‘think small first’ and ‘only once’ principles and the proportionality principle to be applied at all levels of decision-making to define investment priorities and the design of management, audit and control procedures in order to ensure better absorption of the funds;

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Calls on the Member States to inform ~~citizens~~and provide support to citizens, representatives of civil society and regional and local authorities fully about financing possibilities, eligibility for co-financing from the Structural and Cohesion Funds, the co- financing rules, the rules on reimbursement, and where to find calls for proposals;

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2305(INI)

Brice HORTEFEUX, Alain CADEC, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Reiterates that multi-level governance and the partnership principle are key elements in the effectiveness of operational programmes and in high absorption capacity; recommends to the Members States, in line with the principles of subsidiarity and of their institutional autonomy, that they consistently reinforce the partnership and transparency principle, while implementing the operational programmes, and that they involve the economic and social actors and sub- national ~~level~~authorities from the outset in defining investment priorities, in the decision making process itself and in the implementation and evaluation of programmes;

2011/06/09
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. WObserves that European Union policies on the single market and regional development are highly complementary and are both conducive to a Europe marked by cohesion and competitiveness; welcomes the Commission’s proposals aimed at deepening the single market;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Stresses that in a globalised world the single market has to ensure the best possible business environment for enterprises, and to take the specific nature and diversity of SMEs into account in order to foster job creation, innovation and entrepreneurship in all EU regions, including rural areas; welcomes, therefore, the planned assessment of the ‘Small Business Act’ and the reinforcement of the ‘Think Small First’ principle; draws attention to the importance of local businesses for social ties, employment and dynamism in disadvantaged areas, particularly urban districts facing difficulties or sparsely populated areas; calls for them to receive staunch support under the Union’s regional policy;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Stresses that single market accessibility for all EU regions is a prerequisite for the free movement of people, goods, capital and services, and thus for a strong and dynamic single market; points out, in this connection, the essential role played by the Union's regional policy in terms of developing infrastructure, particularly in the less developed, border and outermost regions; advocates a regional approach making use of the Structural Funds to encourage investment in cross-border energy, transport, communication, health, environmental, research and education infrastructure in order to provide access to essential services for all and to ensure harmonious functioning of the internal market; calls for the development of innovative sources of funding (such as public-private partnerships, project bonds and user charges); calls on the Commission and the Member States jointly to address the complexity of the rules governing revenue- generating projects;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Underlines that regions situated on the internal borders of the single market are the first to experience the consequences of removing those borders; asks the Commission to take into account concerns regarding the ‘threshold effect’ between border regions that enjoy comparable degrees of development but receive significantly different levels of financial support under the Union's regional policy; calls for a debate on creating a fair and legitimate intermediate category ~~betwe~~to complement the current ‘convergence’ and ‘regional competitiveness and employment’ objectives;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Stresses that the single market requires an adequately funded regional policy for the period after 2013 and that its budget must on no account be less than that which applies during the current period, 2007-2013;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Takes the view that territorial cooperation (including European Groupings of Territorial Cooperation (EGTCs) and macro-regional strategies) makes a decisive contribution to removing visible and invisible internal borders within the single market and further developing that market; calls, in this connection, for the post-2013 budget for territorial cooperation to be increased; would like access to European regional cooperation funding to be simplified to facilitate participation, inter alia, by private parties;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2277(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Sophie AUCONIE, Andrey KOVATCHEV

Draft opinion
Paragraph 12

12. AWelcomes the role played by the Committee of the Regions in involving local and regional parties in the debate on the Single Market Act; asks the Commission ~~further~~to continue to involve the Committee of the Regions and Parliament, and to work with them in order continuously to monitor the potential and actual consequences for regions of the deepening of the single market; welcomes, therefore, the idea of a single market forum.

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2276(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)

1a. Recalls that European programmes and funding are available and can be used for education, housing and employment of Roma people but that the local authorities, civil society and the potential target groups of these programmes are insufficiently informed about them; calls on the Commission and Member States to improve communication and the promotion of financing opportunities available in these fields;

2010/12/10
Committee: DEVE

2010/2276(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Andrey KOVATCHEV, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)

1b. Calls for better advice to project organisers eligible for European funding for the integration of Roma people, by creating platforms for information, analyses and exchanges of good practices;

2010/12/10
Committee: DEVE

2010/2276(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Stresses the importance of mobility, lifelong-learning, vocational-training and continuing-training programmes with a view to the inclusion of young people and adults from Roma communities and their potential to enter the employment market;

2010/12/16
Committee: CULT

2010/2276(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Calls for better identification and use, at all levels of government, of the existing European funds available to promote the employment, education and culture of Roma peoples;

2010/12/16
Committee: CULT

2010/2245(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Stresses that innovation can be addressed most effectively at the regional level, where physical proximity fosters partnership between actors such as universities, research organisations and industry; notes that the most dynamic technology industries are not necessarily located in or near capital cities but in the proximity of the most innovative universities;

2011/03/04
Committee: REGI

2010/2245(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Underlines the need to detect sleeping innovators, in particular among SMEs; points to the important role of intermediate organisations in detecting sleeping innovators, providing incentives, giving advice and supporting innovation; takes the view that these organisations should be strengthened and that a programme aimed at improving training, qualifications and expertise should be developed for them;

2011/03/04
Committee: REGI

2010/2245(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses the need to strengthen the links between EU budget instruments and EIB funding; recognises the investment leverage potential of these sources of funding and asks for them to be strengthened, especially as regards JEREMIE and JESSICA; emphasises the need to develop funding instruments that are geared to the specific circumstances and needs of the smallest firms and to considerably simplify the procedures for gaining access to the funding;

2011/03/04
Committee: REGI

2010/2245(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Considers that priority should be given to fostering the development at regional level of an innovation culture, both among entrepreneurs, young people undergoing vocational training and workers and among the partners who have an influence on business activities, such as regional public-decision makers, research centres, clusters and funding bodies, which in many cases are not sufficiently aware of the innovation capacities of the firms in their regions, in particular the SMEs (including micro- enterprises and craft firms);

2011/03/04
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Points to the increased importance of cohesion policy following the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon, and to the fact that a third pillar – territorial cohesion – has been added to it, and notes that the regions are best placed to implement that policy on an active basis and that sectoralisation iswould therefore be counterproductive;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Points out that the success of economic and social cohesion policy can be clearly seen in the 271 regions of the 27 Member States and notes that the subsidiarity principle and multilevel governance and partnership are fundamental prerequisites for that success; reaffirms its position on best practice, as set out in its resolution of 24 March 2009 on best practices in the field of regional policy and obstacles to the use of the Structural Funds;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Endorses the view that that the ESF must remain an integral component of cohesion policy and be strengthened; calls for greater coordination with cohesion policy measures and rural development measures under the ERDF so that rural regions can be properly involved and resources used more efficiently;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Danuta Maria HÜBNER, Seán KELLY, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. Insists, in keeping with a spirit of solidarity, on specific support for the EU- 27's mo‘least’ d~~isadvantaged regions~~eveloped regions (Objective 1); stresses, at the same time, the need for a powerful Objective 2 ~~and sound transitional rule~~for the 'most' developed regions and fair provisions for intermediate regions;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Points out that funds must be spent transparently and efficiently in the regions, on the basis of rules that are as simple as possible and sound management; urges that, in keeping with the proportionality principle, the frequency of checks should be commensurate with the risk of irregularities;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 14

14. Notes that a five-year period is too short, since authorisation procedures would be much too long and would not make it possible to use resources efficiently; points to the fact that a seven-year period has proved its worth in the past and that the programming period should in no circumstances be shorter; underscores the fact that a seven-year period, until 2020, would make the link with the EU 2020 strategy clear; notes that it might make sense thereafter to consider a 10-year model (five years + five years) in such a way as to match the scheduling of financing priorities with the terms of office of Parliament and the Commission, combining this with a vision and a policy strategy stretching over 10 years;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC, Maurice PONGA

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15

15. Stresses that cofinancing and the n+2 and n+3 rules should be maintained~~, possibly combined with greater flexibility to cover exceptional situations which might be expected to arise within the nex~~ (except for the first programming ~~period~~year); insists that unspent funds should be made available for other regions and not returned to the Member States;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 15

15. Stresses that cofinancing and the n+2 and n+3 rules should be maintained (except for the first programming year), possibly combined with greater flexibility to cover exceptional situations ~~which might be expected to arise within the next programming period~~; insists that unspent funds should be made available for other regions and not returned to the Member States;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2211(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 18

18. Takes the view that, in addition to assisting the regions, cohesion policy measures also raise the EU's profile in the regions, and points out that better ~~public relations work in the Member States could demonstrate this even more~~communication by all those involved – European institutions, Member States and local authorities - could make the added value of European action even clearlyer;

2010/12/17
Committee: REGI

2010/2206(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Points out that the Treaty of Lisbon grants new powers to the European Union with regard to tourism, particularly with a view to enhancing that sector’s competitiveness and capacity for dynamic and sustainable growthunder Article 195 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, the European Union now has powers in the field of tourism, complementing the action taken by the Member States, in order to promote the competitiveness of EU enterprises in this sector;

2011/02/11
Committee: REGI

2010/2206(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Emphasises that tourism has a tangible impact on the economic, social and territorial cohesion of all the Member States; stresses also that tourism represents the main resource of some EU regions, particularly the outermost regions or regions that are lagging behind economically, and that it has a direct impact on growth in other sectors;

2011/02/11
Committee: REGI

2010/2206(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Considers that social, economic and environmental sustainability are a prerequisite for developing and maintaining all tourism activity; urges the Commission to develop a ‘European label’, along the lines of the European Heritage Label, in order to create a profile for products and services of excellence and at the same time enhance Europe’s image worldwide;

2011/02/11
Committee: REGI

2010/2206(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 7

7. C~~alls on the Commissi~~onsiders that the visibility and attractiveness of EU regions are enhanced by the activities of the cultural and creative industries; calls on, the Member States and the local and regional authorities to ~~encourage and support the development of networks and the creation of partnerships for the exchange of good practice~~make appropriate use of the sectoral or structural financial instruments and the financial engineering systems available at European level in order to encourage culture and creativity and to support the industries working in this sector; hopes that concrete initiatives will be undertaken in support of innovation and the development of new information technologies, and that access will be facilitated for stakeholders in the tourist industry, and particularly small– and medium–sized enterprises, to the relevant financial instruments; calls on the Commission, the Member States and the local and regional authorities to encourage and support the development of networks and the creation of partnerships for the exchange of good practice;

2011/02/11
Committee: REGI

2010/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. ~~Encourages the regions to use the structural funds to address demographic challenges and remain attractive to residents, as that can stem depopulation;~~Does not apply to English text

2011/06/08
Committee: REGI

2010/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Considers that public investments in the health and care systems are important for social cohesion in Europe; calls on the Member States to ensure good healthcare provision in rural areas also, for example through gateway clinics making it possible to combat ‘medical desertification’, and to use structural funds to promote additional measures in the field of telemedicine;

2011/06/08
Committee: REGI

2010/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Considers that public investments in the health and care systems are important for social cohesion in Europe; calls on the Member States to ensure good healthcare provision in rural areas also, for example through gateway clinics, and in border regions through greater cross-border cooperation between clinics and between stakeholders, and to use structural funds to promote additional measures in the field of telemedicine;

2011/06/08
Committee: REGI

2010/2157(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Calls on the Commission to orientate the ESF more towards ensuring that its potential is sufficient to deal with the challenges of demographic change; notes that the know-how of older people should be utilised, for example for coaching projects, and that structures are required for this purpose; takes the view that intergenerational communication is an opportunity that should be seized;

2011/06/08
Committee: REGI

2010/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Welcomes the fact that culture and creative industries (CCIs), that constitute a major part of local and regional attractiveness and vision for their economic, social and territorial development, are recognised throughout the Green Paper as a tool for local and regional development, and points out that local and regional authorities in most Member States are responsible for sectors mentioned in the context of CCIs, especially culture, research, education, tourism and employment;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Citation 2

– having regard to the ~~Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of~~United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural ~~Express~~Organisations (Unesco) Convention on the Protection of Cultural Diversity), adopted by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (Unesco) on 20 October 2005*f 20 October 2005 on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions1,

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas cultural and creative industries are characterised by a dual ~~(economic and cultural) nature~~nature: in an economic sense, in terms of their contribution to employment, growth and wealth creation, and – primarily – in a cultural sense, in terms of their activities, which contribute to development and citizens’ social and cultural integration,

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)

Aa. whereas this specific nature is recognised and promoted by the European Union on the international stage, the EU having adopted a policy of non- liberalisation of audiovisual services and maintenance of its cultural cooperation in the WTO and ratified the Unesco Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions,

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)

Ba. whereas, in accordance with Article 167(4) TFEU, it is necessary to integrate culture into the other European policies, both internal and external, and in this regard to be particularly attentive, in the context of the current globalisation, to the protection and promotion of the diversity of cultural expressions,

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)

Bb. whereas the 2005 Unesco Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions recognises the major role of cultural and creative industries in producing, distributing and providing access to the wide range of cultural goods and services and encourages international cooperation,

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B c (new)

Bc. whereas cultural and creative industries are laboratories for artistic, technical and management innovation and whereas they make possible a broader dissemination of works and artists at European and international level and whereas they contribute to the intercultural dialogue and social cohesion,

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital B d (new)

Bd. whereas the development of trade in cultural and creative goods and services constitutes an important pillar for culture, development and democracy,

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C a (new)

Ca. whereas the role of cultural content in the digital economy is crucial, and whereas Europe’s digital growth will depend in future on having a varied supply of high-quality cultural content,

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)

3a. Underlines that culture has an essential role to play in terms of the sustainable development of cross-border territories, believes that stimulating culture and creativity should be an integral part of territorial cooperation and hence calls on the Commission to map available knowledge of the practices, needs and good experiences of cross- border cultural and creative cooperation and to acquire specific expertise on culture, creativity and cross-border territories (particularly in little-explored areas such as the link between culture, creativity and economy);

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C b (new)

Cb. whereas cultural and creative industries can create wealth and jobs if they are given the means to be competitive with the CCI in countries outside the European Union in the context of a European international competition strategy,

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 b (new)

3b. Welcomes the envisaged actions that are supposed to be undertaken to strengthen the role of CCIs as a catalyst for innovation and structural change under the "Innovation Union" and “Digital Agenda for Europe” flagship initiatives; and emphasises the role of ICTs in CCIs and the “creative nexus” between investment, technology, innovation entrepreneurship and trade, and invites the Commission to promote access to and encourage the use of new ICT technologies in the cultural and creative sector such as the digitalisation and online accessibility of cultural content;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 c (new)

3c. Emphasises the widespread recognition of the European Capital of Culture initiative as a "laboratory" for urban development through culture and invites the Commission to promote this initiative and ensure the right conditions for the transfer of best practices, cultural cooperation and setting up networks for sharing experience on the opportunities of CCIs in order to make use of the full potential of these sectors;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 d (new)

3d. Regrets the fact that the Commission does not pay enough attention to twinning arrangements between towns, municipalities and regions, which have for many years provided an excellent forum for cultural and creative cooperation and information exchange; calls on the Commission in cooperation with European associations of local and regional authorities to promote modern, high quality twinning initiatives and exchanges that involve all parts of the society;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recommends that the Commission evaluate the ~~relevance~~impact of the Structural Funds and existing and future programmes in the field of culture, research, tourism, audiovisual media, youth and education, drawing lessons from existing projects and studies in order to design a post-2013 cohesion policy that would help release the full potential of the cultural sphere, and particularly that of the creative industries;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E

E. whereas there must be a guarantee of strategic investments in cultural and creative industries, for example through access to funding which is adapted to their specific characteristics and needs, ~~with the aim of~~in order to enable them to play a full part in boosting the European economy,

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas it is essential to ensure the artistic and cultural education of citizens and to appreciate the creative process in order to develop creativity and knowledge of the arts, culture, cultural heritage and the cultural diversity of the EUuropean Union,

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G

G. whereas cultural and creative industries play a major role in developing centres of creativity at local and regional level which make regions more attractive and allow businesses and jobs anchored in the local and regional economic fabric to be created and developed, make the regions more attractive to tourists, promote the setting up of new businesses and enhance the profile of these regions, and promote the cultural and artistic sector and the preservation, promotion and enhancement of the European cultural heritage thanks to numerous agencies such as local and regional authorities,

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas artists do not have at present a legal status at EU level that takes into account the specific nature of their work and their career, in regard to mobility, working conditions and social protection in particular,

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Recognising the exceptional cross- sectoral nature of CCIs, calls on the Commission in coordination with Eurostat to pursue its efforts for a better definition of the sector and for it to be more accurately reflected in statistics (development of new models and methodology for gathering qualitative and quantitative data, improving their comparability as well as quality of collection processes);

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2

2. Underlines the need to consider working conditions and the economic, social, legal and taxation aspects of these sectors; invites the Commission, therefore, to analyse the impact the cultural and creative industries have on the EU economy, and to publish a performance evaluation guide on employment and business wealth creation in each of the sector’s branches;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)

2a. Stresses the need to develop a strong sense of cultural and creative entrepreneurship at local, regional, national and European level;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Encourages the Member States and the Commission to promote artistic and cultural education among all age groups, from primary to higher or vocational education, including in the context of lifelong learning, particularly on account of its role in raising awareness of creativity and teaching good use of ITC and respect for intellectual property;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Stresses the need to create optimum conditions for employing university- educated and professional young people from this sector and to train them in the specific economic, taxation, financial and technological aspects of the cultural and creative world and in communication and marketing, intellectual property rights and intergenerational knowledge transfer;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls on local and regional authorities to establish meeting places in order to raise awareness in cultural and creative industries among people working in the sector, through the sharing of expertise ~~and training in new technologies, and among the general public;~~ , experimentation, improving skills and training in new technologies, such as digital technologies, and among the general public through training, debates and other artistic and cultural events, and to develop creativity centres and incubators to allow creative young professionals and businesses to work in a network, promote innovation and enhance the visibility of the sector;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls on the European Commission to set up a multilingual platform so that people working in the cultural and creative sector can join a European-level network ~~enabling them to share good practices and find~~where they can exchange experience and expertise and cooperate on joint projects or pilot projects with a transnational and cross-border dimension and find complete information on the legislation in force and on funding possibilities;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Stresses the importance of developing finance and business management consultation and advisory services to allow people working in the cultural and creative sector, and particularly SMEs and very small businesses, to understand the tools required for good business management in order to improve the creation, production, promotion and distribution of cultural goods and services;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 b (new)

7b. Stresses the need to train professionals capable of ensuring the economic and financial viability of cultural and creative projects in order to improve access to credit when faced with financial and banking institutions that are generally unfamiliar with the specific characteristics of this sector;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Underlines that, in order to guarantee better distribution of European works and repertoires, initiatives must be introduced aimed at improving and promoting translation, dubbing, subtitling ~~and~~, surtitling and digitisation of European cultural works and at drawing up specific measures in these areas as part of the new generation of MEDIA and Culture programmes for the period 2014-2020;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Stresses that online use can represent a real opportunity for better diffusion and distribution of European works, particularly audiovisual works, in conditions where legal supply can develop in an environment of healthy competition which effectively tackles the illegal supply of protected works and new ways of remunerating creators can develop which involve them financially in the success of their works;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 b (new)

8b. Notes that as regards promotion of cultural exchange and diversity, access to third-country markets is subject to many tariff and non-tariff barriers which, together with the insecurity of the distribution and exploitation networks, makes it difficult for European culture to have a genuine presence;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8 a (new)

8a. Proposes the creation of new pilot projects under the Erasmus and Erasmus for Young Entrepreneurs programmes to allow for greater collaboration between universities and enterprises in the cultural and creative sector;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)

9a. Calls on the Commission to establish a legal framework to ensure a high level of confidence in the digital space – commercial and non-commercial – so that cultural and creative industries on the one hand and consumers on the other can make full use of digital distribution channels without fear of being deterred by misleading or abusive practices;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 b (new)

9b. Calls on the Commission to ensure the strict implementation of Article 13 of the 2007 Audiovisual Media Services Directive, which provides for the Member States to ensure that on-demand audiovisual media services promote the production of and access to European works and to report to it on the implementation of this provision no later than 2012;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 c (new)

9c. Calls on the Commission, in view of the proliferation of bilateral trade agreements, to submit to Parliament a clear, overall strategy on the cultural cooperation protocols (CCP)annexed to those agreements, with a view to adapting the offer of European cooperation to the needs and specific characteristics of cultural and creative industries in the partner countries, in accordance with the commitments undertaken in the WTO and the spirit and letter of the Unesco Convention on the Protection and Promotion of the Diversity of Cultural Expressions;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10

10. Calls on the Member States and the Commission to take the necessary steps to establish a European internal market for on-line cultural and creative content and guarantee access to this content to European citizens whilst ensuring that those entitled are protected and properly compensated and that all funding channels for the creative sector are consolidated; stresses, in this context, the essential role of collecting societies for the development of European creativity and the digital economy, and calls on the Commission, in the context of the ongoing drafting of a proposal for a directive on collective rights management, to establish an appropriate legal framework for collecting societies and the reaggregation of copyright repertoire;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)

10a. Points out that the economic model for cultural and creative industries, including in the luxury sector which is representative of it, is based on innovation, constant creativity, consumer confidence and investment in jobs that are often highly skilled and involve unique know-how; calls on the Commission to promote the sustainability of this economic model in its proposals affecting cultural and creative industries by developing a regulatory framework adapted to their specific characteristics, particularly as regards respect for intellectual property rights;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to ~~consider new~~support new and innovative economic models in the creative and cultural sector which are adapted to the impact of globalisation and the challenges of the digital age, particularly with regard to content industries~~, to~~; stresses the importance of considering the best way to adapt the regulatory framework – and in particular the rules on competition policy – to the specific situation of the cultural sector in order to ensure cultural diversity and consumer access to a range of high-quality cultural content and services~~, an~~; emphasises the need to give thought to the optimum conditions for the development of this single market, with particular regard to taxation, for example, concerning deductions at source applicable to copyright income, by allowing the introduction of a reduced rate of VAT for on- or off-line cultural goods and services in order to promote their development;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Calls on the Commission to adapt copyright to the digital age by allowing cultural and creative industries to take full advantage of digital technology and media convergence and to examine specific ways of facilitating the use of creative content and archives and setting up easily accessible systems for acquiring rights;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11b. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to tackle abusive commercial practices and violations of intellectual property rights, which cultural and creative industries can be victims of in both the real and digital economy;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11b. Reaffirms that the status of European artist must be created so that artists are able to enjoy satisfactory working conditions and appropriate measures in regard to tax systems, their right to work, social security rights and copyright in order to better mobility across the European Union;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)

12a. Considers that cultural and creative industries should be at the centre of a new European policy agenda in line with the economic needs of the sector and in the context of digitalisation, and that the future Culture Programme should reflect the needs of the cultural and creative sector in the digital age through a more pragmatic, more comprehensive approach;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Calls on all the actors concerned to consider introducing new, innovative financial instruments which are adapted to the specific needs of these industries, such as bank guarantee measures, repayable advances and venture-capital funds; Stresses the importance of professionals in the banking sector being trained to advise on financing cultural and creative projects so that there is better access to credit from financial institutions;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)

14a. Underlines the importance of patronage and public-private partnerships in the financing and support of cultural and creative activities and calls for better access to credit for cultural and creative industries, and stresses the importance of putting in place new financial arrangements based, for example, on mixed funds and revolving credit funds;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Underlines the importance of patronage and public-private partnerships in the financing and support of cultural and creative activities and calls for better access to credit for these sectors and for alternative formulas such as tax relief or tax incentives to be examined in order to encourage patronage by enterprises;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)

15a. Encourages the Member States and local and regional authorities to create favourable conditions for cultural and creative industries to establish contact with the organisations likely to provide them with funding, and calls on those authorities to raise awareness among financial organisations of the specific situation of cultural and creative industries in order to persuade them to invest in these industries, and more particularly in SMEs and very small businesses, on the basis of cultural projects with a strong economic potential;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2156(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 b (new)

15b. Calls on local and regional authorities to join together in networks with a view to exchanging good practice and setting up cross-border and transnational pilot projects;

2011/02/11
Committee: CULT

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital C

C. whereas informal cooperation arrangements, the Euroregions, the Eurodistricts, the EGTCs, Council of Europe initiatives, the successive Treaties and the EU’s secondary legislation have all contributed to establishing stronger and more sustainable links between territories,

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital G a (new)

Ga. whereas, at the EU’s external borders, the territorial cooperation objective is one aspect of the pre- accession process and of the implementation of neighbourhood policy, and whereas, consequently, coordination of the relevant Community arrangements must be improved,

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4

4. Advocates retaining the current structure of Objective 3, which is divided into three components (– cross-border (component A), transnational (component B) and interregional), (component C) – and the current emphasis on the cross-border component, which receives at least 70% of the territorial cooperation budget;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Considers that, if a distinction should continue to be made between the cross- border component (component A), which meets the local needs of cross-border population catchment areas, and the transnational component (component B), which facilitates cooperation over wider strategic areas, better coordination between the two components is needed;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Calls ~~nonetheless~~furthermore – with a view to ensuring the coherence and continuity of territorial cooperation measures and given the strategic nature of the projects in question – for greater flexibility in exploiting the scope offered by Article 21 of the ERDF Regulation with regard to the location of cross-border and transnational cooperation activities; to that end, calls for a review of the geographical limit of 150 km set for cross-border cooperation programmes for coastal and maritime regions;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Jan OLBRYCHT, Lambert van NISTELROOIJ

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7

7. Calls for forward thinking to ascertain the strategic needs of each border region and area of cooperation in connection with the Europe 2020 strategy, and, subsequently, for European territorial cooperation to be integrated in, and tailored to, all levels of strategic planning: European, national, ~~and~~ regional and local; urges the Commission to clarify, without delay, its proposals on the thematic concentration of funds, with reference to an EU 2020 ‘thematic menu’;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls for funds for territorial cooperation no longer to be allocated by Member State, but at EU level and on a programme-by-programme basis, on the basis of the criteria laid down in Annex 2, paragraph 5 of the basic regulationto be allocated for each programme of territorial cooperation on the basis of harmonised criteria so as to provide a strategic, integrated response to the needs of each territory or area involved; invites in this respect the Commission to consider other relevant, strategic and measurable criteria that could reflect the needs of territories and ~~reduce~~weight the dem~~phasis on the most important criterion: demography~~ography criteria;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Stresses once again the importance of interregional cooperation (component C), but deplores the lack of funds allocated to it; ~~calls~~ suggests, therefore, a reduction from 75% to 60% in the Community cofinancing rate of this ~~programme~~component for participants from the regions covered by the ‘competitiveness and employment’ objective, calls for the thematic areas of cooperation to be widened to encompass governance and territorial development; also encourages regions to make better use of the scope for interregional cooperation offered by Article 37(6)(b) of the basic regulation; advocates, therefore, that the ‘interregional’ component of Objective 3 should also ~~be used to facilitate~~cover the coordination and running of such projects, tohe pooling of know-how and tohe exchange of good practices~~, on the basis of ever closer cooperation with, and the support of, INTERACT~~;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Advocates the continuation of the INTERACT programme, to provide support for territorial cooperation programmes, and calls for more effective coordination between INTERACT and URBACT, ESPON and component C, with a view to better implementing Objective 3;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13

13. Believes that greater complementarity between the ‘territorial cooperation’ objective, on the one hand, and the ‘convergence’ and ‘competitiveness and employment’ objectives, on the other, is needed; suggests that regional operational programmes should take an interest and participate in the cross-border ~~and~~, transnational and interregional projects that concern them by earmarking funding by territory for priority projects identified in advance ~~and agreed~~, in consultation with their partners in the programmes, in accordance with the principles of multi-level governance and the partnership;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Points out that the concept of macro- regions, a Council initiative, came into being as an experimental, logical way of coordinating common projects covering a very large territory, characterised by common territorial problems, with a view to exploiting the advantages of an integrated ~~and~~, multisectoral and territorial approach based on common strategic actions receiving support from existing funds; points out that these strategies must neither generate additional expenditure for the EU budget, nor necessitate the establishment of new institutions or the application of new rules;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Points out that territorial cooperation concerns both the EU’s internal and external borders, including matters relating to current and future macro- regional strategies; asks the Commission to consider how to create more effective synergies between initiatives under the ERDF, the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA), the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) and the European Development Fund (EDF);

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Points out that territorial cooperation concerns both the EU’s internal and external borders; asks the Commission to consider how to create more effective synergies between initiatives under the ERDF, the Instrument for Pre-Accession Assistance (IPA), the European Neighbourhood and Partnership Instrument (ENPI) and the European Development Fund (EDF);Does not affect English version.

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 – introductory part

21. Believes, however, that their establishment must be facilitated and calls on the Commission to propose amendments to Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on EGTCs without delay, taking due account of the problems identified by the ~~region~~local and regional authorities and the groupings already in place and on the basis of work undertaken by the Committee of the Regions, with a view to:

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 – indent 3

– redrafting Article 4(3) to ensure stricter compliance with the three-month deadline for the processing of applications to set up an EGTC,

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 – indent 4

– simplifying the laws governing ~~the~~ staff ~~of and the tax arrangements applicable to EGTCs~~ing;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21 – indent 4 a (new)

– ensuring that the tax rules for EGTCs are no less favourable than other legal arrangements governing the implementation of cooperation projects or programmes;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Calls for the allocation of global grants to EGTCs with projects that reflect the objectives and strategies of the relevant cooperation programmes, to enable them to directly manage Structural Fund appropriations, and for the multinational and multilateral nature of EGTCs to be better reflected in regulations governing the other European funds, with a view to improving their access to other sources of financing;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22 a (new)

22a. Welcomes the launch by the Committee of the Regions of the European EGTC Platform, which aims to facilitate the exchange of experiences, the pooling of best practices and the provision of technical support for EGTCs;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24

24. Invites the Commission to propose specific measures which simplify rules on auditing and control, authorise more systematic standard-rate costing, lay down more detailed EU rules on eligibility for EU funding, make for greater flexibility in the implementation of automatic decommitments, raise the acceptable error rate to 5% and increase technical assistance to 8%, with a view to ensuring that the management bodies concentrate more on the launching and strategic ~~managemen~~support of projects, rather than merely on management and whether applications comply with administrative rules;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24 a (new)

24a. Calls on the Commission to clarify, as soon as possible, the provisions governing the principle of conditionality intended for territorial cooperation; considers that, if this conditionality is to create the conditions for the better and more effective use of funds, it must not further complicate implementation, to the detriment of programme managers and beneficiaries;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Stresses, furthermore, that arrangements for involving private stakeholders must also be simplified; recommends setting up financial engineering systems, along the lines of the JEREMIE and JESSICA initiatives, to facilitate cross-border projects which ~~generate revenue~~are vectors of economic development, the participation of private stakeholders and the establishment of public-private partnerships;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26

26. Deplores the low profile of territorial cooperation, in the eyes of both national and local authorities and the general public;, a~~sks~~nd the ~~Commission to come up with ways to raise the profile of EGTCs with territorial cooperation stakeholders and the general public~~refore calls for more effective communication on completed projects;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 26 a (new)

26a. Asks the Commission to come up with ways to raise the profile of EGTCs and their activities among territorial cooperation stakeholders and the general public;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2155(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Asks for more effective coordination of communication between all stakeholders involved in the process of implementing territorial cooperation initiatives, suggests that all programmes in the same component should be recognisable by their use of the same logo, and invites the Commission, by the start of the next programming period, to come up with a large-scale media and awareness-raising campaign for border regions on the benefits and achievements of territorial cooperation ;

2011/02/22
Committee: REGI

2010/2142(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Notes that cohesion funds are subject to particularly complex rules and are implemented differently from other EU spending areas, which makes them more vulnerable to errors; draws attention to the fact that the error rate in cohesion spending remains the highest of all EU payments with greater than 5 % in 2009; ~~is aware of the~~highlights, nonetheless, the major decrease in the error rate in comparison to 2008;

2011/02/21
Committee: REGI

2010/2142(DEC)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. In the context of the revision of the Financial Regulation, stresses the need to harmonise rules and management schemes for cohesion programmes under shared management, where it is demonstrated that this can bring improvements, while retaining procedures that have proved effective; notes that any governance problem between the Financial Regulation and the cohesion regulations can be avoided by better alignment of eligibility rules across various policies;

2011/02/21
Committee: REGI

2010/2142(DEC)

Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)

5a. Calls on the Commission and the Member States to consider the advisability of developing the 'contract of confidence’ principle so as to be able to scale down checks on systems that have proved their worth in combating errors and fraud;

2011/02/21
Committee: REGI

2010/2139(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12

12. Notes that the current framework of cohesion policy has proven to allow a flexible and appropriate response to the rapidly deteriorating socioeconomic environment; underlines that Member States appreciated that the crisis measures could be tailored to their specific needs; calls nonetheless for greater flexibility in the rules to enable crises to be combated;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2139(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15

15. Highlights the particular added value of more synergies between ERDF and ESF~~, since~~ and the rural development component of the EARFD; notes that experience clearly proves that successful performance of ESF- financed programmes is essential in order to maximise the effectiveness of ERDF funding for economic actions;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2139(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Believes that simplification of provisions and procedures ~~at EU and national level should continue without creating major difficulties for beneficiaries and~~should continue both at EU and Member State level, primarily through developing improved rules for the future negotiation of regulations applicable to the next programming period; considers that regional policy should be better adapted to the needs of users and that this simplification should contribute to the increased efficiency of this policy; regrets that, due to superfluous bureaucracy, overcomplicated rules and a lack of harmonised procedures, many funds remain unused;

2011/02/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses the importance of the full implementation of the Small Business Act as a means of reducing the administrative burden and fostering the role of SMEs in the internal market; welcomes the establishment of a permanent SME Forum on access to financing opportunities and calls for an integrated strategy ~~for SME~~that will genuinely make it easier for SMEs to obtain financing within the EU;

2010/11/12
Committee: REGI

2010/2095(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Not~~Emphasises thate re~~search and innovation is most effectively addressed at regional level in~~levance of the regional level in addressing research and innovation, owing to the proximity of actors such as universities, public research organisations and industry, promoting partnership in knowledge transfer and the exchange of good practices between regions; in this regard, calls on the Commission to invest in innovation clusters and networks, through enhanced cooperation with the European Investment Bank and within the framework of a permanent industrial policy task force;

2010/11/12
Committee: REGI

2010/2095(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 11

11. Notes that an integrated strategy for EU industries should focus on overcoming the skill shortages affecting SMEs and industries. In this respect, emphasises the need for coordinated initiatives to improve the teaching of STEM subjects (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) at all levels, whilst promoting additional coordinated and targeted higher qualifications; calls on the Member States to include vocational qualifications for entrepreneurship in university programmes and other higher education courses; ~~highlights the need to revise the European Social Fund in accordance with the revised skills~~emphasises that the European Social Fund must adapt to the changing requirements ~~set by~~of the industrial sector;

2010/11/12
Committee: REGI

2010/2088(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Approves the Commission’s proposal to make ~~a set of~~other indicators – in addition to GDP figures – available for EU policies with a view to improving both the circumstances in which decisions are taken and the response to the concerns of citizens in Europe’s various regions; points out, in that connection, that a number of national and international actors have acknowledged the relevance of indicators which supplement GDP figures; to that end, supports Eurostat’s activities;

2010/10/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2088(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Takes the view that GDP ~~is an essential~~cannot constitute the sole measurement of economic growth~~, but is insufficient~~ to assess regional development and establish cohesion policies;

2010/10/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2088(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. In the light of the ever closer degree of interdependence between economic, social and environmental issues, takes the view that focusing on GDP alone is likely to provide an incomplete impression that takes no account of the actual situations in the regions~~, and could result in poor choices being made and inappropriate decisions being taken~~;

2010/10/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2088(INI)

Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Reiterates that the condition of natural environments, environmental sustainability, fairness and social integration are now just as important as the economy among the key issues underpinning the European model for development; states, furthermore, that an overarching approach should be taken with regard to assessing people’s wellbeing and quality of life, as well as regions’ vulnerabilitieseducation, health, protecting the well-being of citizens, social integration and environmental protection are issues underpinning the European model for development, which is based on a social market economy which seeks to guarantee smart, sustainable and inclusive growth;

2010/10/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2088(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Maurice PONGA, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Draft opinion
Paragraph 5

5. Calls on the Commission, therefore, to introduce, as a matter of priority ~~and urgency,~~, relevant indicators in addition to GDP for environmental and social issues, with a view to establishing a more comprehensive picture of regional cohesion policies, ~~at the latest~~if possible by the start of the 2014-2020 programming period;

2010/10/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2088(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 6

6. Proposes that in future the criteria governing regions’ eligibility for EU funding should be considered in the light of the set of relevant indicators that ismay be brought in; calls for environmental and social indicators to be ~~given the same status as~~taken into account alongside GDP when it comes to classifying the regions.

2010/10/07
Committee: REGI

2010/2087(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 1

1. Considers the Black Sea region to be a strategically crucial area and ~~deems~~believes that an EU Strategy for the Black Sea will contribute to realising the aims of European integration, as well as being essential to ithe region’s sustainable and coordinated development;

2010/11/10
Committee: REGI

2010/2087(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 2

2. Believes that in order to launch an effective Strategy for the Black Sea, it is vital to involve fully all the countries concerned, with no distinction between EU and non-EU countries; calls for cooperation between all the relevant regions and stresses the importance of participation by bodies at all levels of governance in order to ensure the success of an integrated approach, through the involvement of existing organisations, such as the BSEC, the PABSEC and the Commission on the Black Sea, but also through the creation of new ones where necessary, with the aim of jointly identifying common challenges and available resources, as well as areas where coordinated action can bring significant added value;

2010/11/10
Committee: REGI

2010/2087(INI)

Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC, Sophie AUCONIE

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Encourages the development, in the context of the Strategy, of an integrated approach and the use of the well- established principles of the EU’s Cohesion Policy; in particular, believes that cross-border cooperation between regions should be promoted, in order to tackle common problems through coordinated action; points out that the European Grouping for Territorial Cooperation (EGTC) offers a suitable cooperation framework for structured, multi-level governance; calls on the Commission to explore ways of better coordinating the various European instruments providing for cross-border cooperation on the Union’s external borders;

2010/11/10
Committee: REGI

2010/2053(INI)

Sophie AUCONIE, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Maurice PONGA, Alain CADEC

Draft opinion
Paragraph 3

3. Hopes that the aims of the directive may start to be achieved in the near future and that the whole of the EU and its regions may benefit, thus contributing to real economic, social and territorial cohesion; underlines the role of the structural funds and other funding instruments in providing access to and ensuring the availability of infrastructure such as transport, telecommunications and research and innovation, in granting access to public goods and services in the regions, particularly in areas unless attractive to investors, and in helping to encourage exchanges of good practice in the provision of key services; demands, in this context, greater coherence and coordination between all policies;

2010/11/11
Committee: REGI

2010/2053(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Takes the view that, in order to make administrative procedures more efficient, public authorities should ~~be obliged to adhere to the principle of~~promote and consolidate multilingualism by using, in addition to their own language, one of the EU’s official working languages and, if possible, a selected language of the country that is their closest partner in terms of economic or – if this is impossible to ascertain – territorial cooperation;

2010/11/11
Committee: REGI

2010/2013(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)

7a. Takes the view that artistic and cultural education form an integral part of education and training policy, and that they offer a means of building on non-academic aptitudes, thus fostering both individual fulfilment, including that of failing students, and the acquisition of basic skills, while at the same time passing on genuine cultural knowledge;

2010/04/07
Committee: CULT

2010/0395(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 1

1. When the Commission implements the budget on a shared management basis, budget implementation tasks shall be delegated to the Member States. Member States shall respect the principles of sound financial management, transparency and non-discrimination and ensure the visibility of Union action when they manage Union funds. To this end, Member States shall fulfil the control and audit obligations and assume the resulting responsibilities laid down in this Regulation. Complementary provisions may be laid down in sector- specific rules.

2011/05/30
Committee: REGI

2010/0395(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

Member States shall prevent, detect and correct irregularities and fraud when executing tasks related to the implementation of the budget. To this end, in accordance with the sector-specific rules, they shall carry out ex ante and ex post controls including, where appropriate, on the spot checks, to ensure that the actions financed from the budget are effectively carried out and implemented correctly, recover funds unduly paid and bring legal proceedings as necessary.

2011/05/30
Committee: REGI

2010/0395(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 1

~~In accordance with t~~The sector-specific rules~~, Member States shall accredit one or more public sector bodies which shall b~~ shall set out the srolely responsible for the proper management and control of the funds, for which accreditation has been granted. This shall be without prejudice to the possibility for these bodies to carry out tasks not related to the management of Union funds or to entrust certain of their tasks to other bodies of the Commission and the Member States in the management and control of Union funds.

2011/05/30
Committee: REGI

2010/0395(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 2

The accreditation shall be given by a Member State authority in accordance with sector-specific rules ensuring that the body is capable of properly managing the funds. The sector-specific rules may also define a role of the Commission in the accreditation process.deleted

2011/05/30
Committee: REGI

2010/0395(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 3 – subparagraph 3

The accrediting authority shall be responsible for supervising the body and for taking all necessary measures to remedy any deficiency in its operation, including the suspension and withdrawal of the accreditation.deleted

2011/05/30
Committee: REGI

2010/0395(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 4 – introductory part

4. ~~Bodies accredited pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article~~At the appropriate level, Member States shall:

2011/05/30
Committee: REGI

2010/0395(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 4 – point c

~~c) be subject to an independent external audit, performed in accordance with internationally accepted auditing standards by an audit service functionally independent of the accredited body;~~deleted

2011/05/30
Committee: REGI

2010/0395(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – introductory part

~~Bodies accredited pursuant to paragraph 3 of this Article shall provide the Commission by 1 February of the following financial year~~At the appropriate level, Member States shall provide the Commission with:

2011/05/30
Committee: REGI

2010/0395(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point a

a) their accounts drawn up for the expenditure made in the execution of the tasks entrusted; , together with a management declaration confirming that; - the accounts are presented in an exact and exhaustive manner; - the expenditure referred to has been effected in accordance with the sector- specific rules; - the control procedures put in place give the necessary guarantees concerning the legality and regularity of the transactions carried out;

2011/05/30
Committee: REGI

2010/0395(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point c

c) a management declaration of assurance as to the completeness, accuracy and veracity of the accounts, the proper functioning of the internal control systems as well as to the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions and the respect of the principle of sound financial management;deleted

2011/05/30
Committee: REGI

2010/0395(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 1 – point d

d) the opinion of an independent audit body ~~on the management declaration of assurance mentioned in point (c) of this paragraph, covering all its elements~~.

2011/05/30
Committee: REGI

2010/0395(COD)

Proposal for a regulation
Article 56 – paragraph 5 – subparagraph 2

If a Member State has accredited more than one body per policy area, it shall by 15 February of the following financial year provide the Commission with a synthesis report consisting of an overview at national level of all management declarations of assurance and the independent audit opinions thereon, prepared for the policy area concernedThese elements should be forwarded to the Commission on the dates given in the sector-specific rules.

2011/05/30
Committee: REGI

2010/0044(COD)

Marco SCURRIA, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a decision
Recital 3

(3) The Treaty also establishes citizenship of the Union, which complements national citizenship of the respective Member States, and which is an important element in safeguarding and strengthening the process of European integration. For citizens to give their full support to European integration, greater emphasis should be placed on their common values, history and culture as key elements of their membership of a society founded on the principles of freedom, democracy, respect for human rights, cultural and linguistic diversity, tolerance and solidarity.

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 2

For the purposes of this Decision, ‘sites’ shall mean monuments, natural or urban sites, cultural landscapes, places of remembrance, cultural goods and objects, cultural routes and intangible heritage attached to a place, including contemporary heritage.

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Marco SCURRIA, Santiago FISAS AYXELÀ, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID

Proposal for a decision
Article 4

The action shall be open to the participation of the Member States of the European Union~~. This participation shall b~~ and third countries taking part in the EU Culture Programme on a voluntary basis.

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 8 – paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. In the event that the panel of experts decides that neither of the two sites proposed by a Member State are eligible, the possibility will be assessed of awarding the label to one of the second sites proposed by the other Member States. However, no more than twenty-seven sites may be proposed for the European label each year.

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 10 – paragraph 4 a (new)

4a. The Commission shall forward to the European Parliament, the Council and the Committee of the Regions a complete list of the sites proposed by the Member States.

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 2

~~A n~~New application ~~shall be submitted for these sites on the basis of~~s for these sites shall be subject to the new criteria and procedures laid down in Articles 6 to 9 and shall be transmitted to the Commission by the relevant Member States at the latest on 31 January [of the year in question].

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 7

The European Heritage Label shall be awarded to the sites covered by this paragraph in principle on a permanent basis under the conditions laid down in Articles 14 and 15 and subject to the continuation of the action.deleted

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 18 – paragraph 1 – subparagraph 8

~~Candidates which were not retained in the final list may submit a new application for the pre-selection at national level in the following years.~~deleted

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 1

2. Member States which did not participate in the intergovernmental European Heritage Label shall have the possibility to propose up to a maximum of four sites for the attribution of the European Heritage Label in [the second year following the entry into force of the present Decision].deleted

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 2

An application shall be submitted for these sites on the basis of the criteria and procedures laid down in Articles 6 to 9 and shall be transmitted to the Commission by the relevant Member States at the latest on 31 January [of the year in question].deleted

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 3

The new applications shall be assessed by the European panel. If one of the sites proposed by a specific Member State does not fulfil the criteria or if further information is needed, the European panel shall initiate a dialogue with the Member State via the Commission in order to examine whether the application can be improved before a final decision is taken. Visits to the site may be organised if necessary.deleted

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 4

The European panel shall deliver a report on sites with a recommendation for the attribution of the European Heritage Label by the end of [the year in question] unless further clarifications are necessary from the Member State.deleted

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 5

~~The Commission shall then officially designate the sites.~~deleted

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 6

The European Heritage Label shall be awarded to the sites covered by this paragraph in principle on a permanent basis under the conditions laid down in Articles 14 and 15 and subject to the continuation of the action.deleted

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2010/0044(COD)

Proposal for a decision
Article 18 – paragraph 2 – subparagraph 7

~~Candidates which were not retained in the final list may submit a new application for the pre-selection at national level in the following years.~~deleted

2010/10/04
Committee: CULT

2009/2235(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 22

22. Considers that territorial cohesion, included as a new objective in the Lisbon Treaty, must be an integral part of the strategy, as a pre-requisite for the achievement of its goals; believes that local initiatives for crossborder cooperation offer a potential for territorial cohesion which has as yet not been sufficiently exploited;

2010/03/29
Committee: REGI

2009/2234(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Notes that, out of a total of 117 operational programmes financed by the ESF, 12 were reoriented (for Austria, Germany, Hungary, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Poland, Portugal and the United Kingdom, as well as two for Spain) with the aim of tackling specific needs resulting from the crisis, and calls on the Commission to assist the Member States to use this available flexibility to reorient their operational programmes and to widely publicise the fact among the relevant regional and local actors as quickly as possible with a view to providing short-term assistance to specific at-risk groups and categories;

2010/03/26
Committee: REGI

2009/2233(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5

5. Endorses the views expressed in the Green Paper on Territorial Cohesion con ~~the main factors in territorial cohesion; makes specific reference to respect for region~~cerning competitiveness, which 'depends on building links with other territories to ensure that common assets are used in a cordinated and sustainable way' in order to release the potential inherent in the territorial diversity ~~and~~of the ~~development of regional potential and competitiveness, emphasising the importance of accessibility through public services and suitable~~European Union; in that connection, emphasises the importance for competitiveness and the opening-up of all territories of the coordinated and integrated development of transport and ICTs and the pooling, where appropriate, of energy, healthcare, research, education and environmental protection infrastructure~~, and~~; calls on the Commission to bring forward concrete proposals for implementing the objective of territorial cohesion;

2010/07/01
Committee: REGI

2009/2233(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6

6. Takes the view that the Member States must support a place-based approach to framing and implementing cohesion policy; acknowledges that the role of the regions varies between Member States depending on their political and administrative structure; requests that an improvement be sought, by promoting the principle of decentralisation, over the current programming period, in which the regions are administering on average only 30.5% of the overall budget allocated to cohesion policy, with the remainder being administered by central governments;

2010/07/01
Committee: REGI

2009/2233(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)

6a. Takes the view that border territories in particular highlight the problems which the European Union is facing in connection with the challenges of opening up borders, completing the internal market and globalisation; emphasises that the competitiveness of such territories may be undermined by the need to cope with competing fiscal and welfare systems, complex administrative arrangements and migratory flows between regions and states; stresses the importance of developing the tools needed for cross-border cooperation and multi- level governance and calls on the Commission to encourage exchanges of information and best practices;

2010/07/01
Committee: REGI

2009/2233(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Takes the view that if the key indicator in deciding which areas are eligible for EU financial assistance should be the level of GDP ~~and that~~, the introduction of other indicators can ~~only~~ be admitted after studies have been conducted on their relevance and on the way in which that information is collected and processed;

2010/07/01
Committee: REGI

2009/2232(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital E a (new)

Ea. whereas the logic of transparency should go hand in hand with the process of simplifying the procedures for obtaining Structural Funds;

2010/03/29
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital Ca (new)

Ca. whereas funding application procedures that are too complicated and an excessive number of checks are likely to discourage potential beneficiaries of cohesion policy,

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3

3. Stresses that multi-level governance allows better exploitation of the potential of territorial cooperation thanks to the relations developed among private and public actors across borders; urges those Member States which have not yet done so to adopt as soon as possible the necessary provisions allowing the setting up of European Groupings ofor Territorial Cooperation; recommends that the Commission promote exchange of information between the EGTCs already created and those in the process of being set up; congratulates the Committee of the Regions on the quality of its work on EGTCs and welcomes the provision of information on them through the EGTC Internet portal;

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. Calls on the Member States also to strengthen, where appropriate, the role of regional and local authorities in programme management and implementation~~, w~~ and to build up the re ~~appropriate~~sources at their disposal; recommends the adoption in the cohesion policy of the local development methodology based on local partnerships, in particular for projects related to urban, rural and cross-border issues;

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Calls on the Commission to create a training and mobility schysteme for local and regional actors involved in running cohesion policy programmes, in order to raise the standard of proposed projects and meet the cohesion policy’s objective of efficiency;

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19

19. Is convinced that compliance with the procedures cannot be at the expense of the quality of interventions; asks the Commission for a more result-oriented policy in the future, focused on quality performance and strategic project development rather than on controls; to this end, urges the Commission to develop objective and measurable indicators which are comparable across the Union and to give further consideration to the need for flexible rules in the event of economic crises;

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Welcomes the ongoing simplification of the Financial Regulation and the Structural Funds regulations; calls for a simpler architecture for the Funds after 2013, not as a consequence of the economic crisis but as a general principle of the future cohesion policy, in order to avoid discouraging potential partners from taking part in projects; recommends that greater transparency in respect of the use of the EU Funds should not lead to a disproportionately increased administrative burden;

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2231(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Calls on the Commission to take on board the principles of differentiation and proportionality in future regulations and to adapt requirements according to the size of programmes and nature of partners, especially when small public authorities are involved; asks for wider use of lump- sums and flat rates for all Funds, in particular for overheads and technical assistance; proposes that provision be made for more flexible evaluation criteria for innovative projects and softer control requirements for pilot projects; encourages the Commission to develop the principle of a ‘bond of trust’ with the Member States undertaking to and succeeding in making good use of the Funds;

2010/07/15
Committee: REGI

2009/2230(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Guided by the principle of subsidiarity, and seeing the enormous potential for cooperation at local and regional level, underlines the considerable importance of creating an effective, multilevel structure for cooperation; in this respect, calls for the cross-border cooperation mechanisms put in place at the local and regional level to be improved, developed and strengthened;

2010/03/30
Committee: REGI

2009/2225(INI)

Draft opinion
Paragraph 4

4. Recommends that an EU-level ~~information~~awareness-raising campaign be initiated in order to ~~achieve a higher level of awareness~~ensure that citizens are better informed;

2010/02/02
Committee: CULT

2009/2225(INI)

Dominique BAUDIS, Gaston FRANCO, Tokia SAÏFI, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Dominique VLASTO

Draft opinion
Paragraph 9

9. Urges Member States to provide adequate financial support to the EU digitisation policy~~, while encouraging both the Commission and the Member States to find appropriate solutions to the current legal obstacles~~.

2010/02/02
Committee: CULT

2009/2215(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11

11. Is keen to see new projects in the cultural field put on the UfM’s agenda in the very near future; ~~suggests that priority be given to setting up~~encourages the initiatives intended to promote mutual understanding and dialogue between cultures and supports the Anna Lindh Foundation, the Bibliotheca Alexandrina and the Arab World Institute; calls for the implementation of a Euro- Mediterranean ~~junior Erasmus programme called ‘Averroës’, as a way of stepping up exchanges between secondary school pupils in UfM member countries~~strategy for cultural affairs and especially for higher visibility of the audiovisual programme established by the UfM through the Permanent Conference of the Mediterranean Audiovisual Operators (COPEAM); supports the EuroMed-News project aimed at informing the populations of the Mediterranean countries about EU-supported actions in the region;

2010/03/31
Committee: AFET

2009/2215(INI)

Dominique BAUDIS, Gaston FRANCO, Tokia SAÏFI, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Dominique VLASTO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 a (new)

11a. Welcomes the choice of Marseille- Provence as European Capital of Culture in 2013: the project has a strong Euro- Mediterranean dimension intended to bring together the peoples on both sides of the Mediterranean; emphasises that the purpose of this highly symbolic cultural project is to drive concrete, innovative action to improve the dialogue between the cultures of Europe and the Mediterranean;

2010/03/31
Committee: AFET

2009/2215(INI)

Dominique BAUDIS, Gaston FRANCO, Tokia SAÏFI, Marie-Thérèse SANCHEZ-SCHMID, Dominique VLASTO

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 11 b (new)

11b. Welcomes the formation of the Euro- Mediterranean University EMUNI into a network; emphasises the importance of devoting a significant proportion of the UfM’s activities to education, school and university exchanges and research as ways of bringing the peoples on both sides of the Mediterranean closer together; therefore requests: - the setting up of a Euro-Mediterranean junior Erasmus programme called ‘Averroës’, as a way of stepping up exchanges between secondary school pupils in UfM member countries; - that adequate funding be devoted to strengthening academic exchange programmes such as ‘Erasmus Mundus’ and providing better information on existing exchange programmes that students are unaware of; - the development of a fully-functioning Mediterranean knowledge triangle – that is, greater coordination between training, research and innovation, and the creation of a genuine Euro-Mediterranean higher education, science and research area; - more structured cooperation in the field of higher education and research; - that the recognition of qualifications, the introduction of joint qualifications and common graduate schools be promoted; - improved mobility for researchers and efforts to fight the brain drain by improving universities’ attractiveness and quality; - that emphasis be placed on dialogue between universities and enterprises and on public-private partnerships in the field of research;

2010/03/31
Committee: AFET

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital A

A. whereas investing in actions for young people is crucial for the future of European societies, especially at times when the proportion of young people in the total population is constantly decreasing,

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Recital F

F. whereas health care for young people is of great importance and ~~may be affected by a polluted environment and poor housing,~~ a favourable environment should be promoted in terms of education, employment, social inclusion and health,

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8

8. ~~Points out the importance of an evaluation of the state of implementation of the EU Strategy for Youth; stresses that Member States’~~ Stresses that Member States’ progress reports in the youth field should be made publicly available in order to increase public awareness; progress reports in the youth field should be made publicly available in order to increase public awareness;

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9

9. Considers that, in order to have a complete EU strategy for youth, the formulation of youth policies and of EU programmes and actions should go hand in hand in an accurate and transparent way; stresses the need to mobilise and to adapt the EU programmes and social funds for youth and to facilitate access to them;

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14

14. Calls for measures to ensure respect for diversity and the successful integration of ~~new immigrant youngsters and children~~youngsters;

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 16

16. Strongly encourages Member States to promote learning and training mobility for students and youth workers, which is a key factor for gaining learning and working experience, in particular by opening up youth programmes to broad participation;

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 18

18. Underlines the importance of ~~support~~helping young people with a migrant background into achiev~~ing~~e the necessary command of the language ~~and familiarising themselves with the culture of the host Member Stat~~of the host Member State and knowledge of its culture;

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 20

20. Calls on Member States to ~~improve the quality of young people’s job opportunities an~~facilitate the access for young people to all kinds of employment in good working conditions;

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 21

21. Suggests promoting an entrepreneurial culture~~; underlines the importance of young people entering~~ among young people by improving communication on entrepreneurship; into entrepreneurship on an informed basis;

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25

25. Strongly encourages ~~enhanc~~promoting the participation of young people and youth organisations in the formulation of general policies and, in particular, of youth policy through ~~the~~ structured dialogue ~~and with the help of new technologies~~;

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 25 a (new)

25a. Recommends guiding young people in their use of new technologies by means of media education policies and policies to raise awareness of the dangers inherent in their uncontrolled use;

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27

~~27. Regrets that no specific action is proposed in order to better communicate EU programmes to young people;~~deleted

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 28

28. Calls on the Member States to ~~make~~facilitate access to new technologies ~~readily available~~in order to boost young people’s creativity and capacity for innovation and generate interest in culture, the arts and science;

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31

31. Takes the view that youth volunteering should be supported ~~without discriminating against disadvantaged young people who cannot afford the luxury of committing themselves to volunteering~~in order to develop solidarity;

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)

Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 33

~~33. Stresses also the need to develop more outreach programmes for marginalised groups, such as legal immigrants, people with special needs, homeless people and others;~~deleted

2010/03/01
Committee: CULT

2009/2159(INI)