22 Amendments of Herbert DORFMANN related to 2022/2194(INL)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 4 a (new)
Citation 4 a (new)
– having regard to Regulation (EC) No 1082/2006 on a European grouping of territorial cooperation (EGTC), as amended by Regulation (EU) 1302/2013,
Amendment 51 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Underlines that Member States are not obliged to trigger the instrument to address the obstacle, rather their response can vary from deciding not to address it, addressing it through the review of its administrative or legal framework through unilateral actions taken at the national level, soft-law instruments, or finally through the setting up of a Cross- border Committee tasked with the drafting of an ad-hoc solution to address one or more of the obstacles identified;
Amendment 74 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 11
Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 11
(11) In its assessment of data between 2014-2019, the relevant European Added Value Assesment (EAVA) study by the European Parliamentary Research Service found that removing obstacles would bring significant benefits for NUTS3 border regions and to the entire Union economy. More precisely, a total Gross Value Added (GVA) benefit of a complete removal of legal and administrative barriers would yield around €457 billion, representing 3, 8 % of total 2019 EU GVA. Removing 20% of obstacles for all border regions, would result in a total GVA benefit of €123 billion, representing around 1% of total 2019 EU GVA, as well as total employment benefit of 1 million jobs representing around 0,5% of total employment at EUnion level3 . _________________ 3 EPRS, Mechanism to resolve legal and administrative obstacles in a cross-border context: European added value assessment, PE 740.233, May 2023.
Amendment 80 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 16
Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 16
(16) In order to coordinate the tasks of different authorities, which in some Member States will include national and regional legislative bodies, within a given Member State and between those of one or more neighbouring Member States, each Member State should be required to establish or designate a national Cross- border Coordination Points either as a separate bodyies, or within an existing national authorityies or bodyies or by entrusting the task to an appropriate authorityies or bodyies. The tasks of the Cross-border Coordination Points are set out in this Regulation.
Amendment 82 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 19
Annex I – paragraph 8 – point 19
(19) Following the receipt of an initiative document, the Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact should liaise with all relevant national, regional and local authorities in its Member State and with the Cross-border Coordination Points in the bordering Member State(s) concerned. The Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact should provide the initiator with a preliminary assessment regarding whether the initiative document complies with the requirements set out in this Regulation, and whether the obstacle exists. The Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact should then be able to decide whether a procedure leading to the conclusion of an ad-hoc solution is to be launched, whether a solution is to be found at national level, or that it considers the removal of one or more obstacles hampering the implementation of a joint project falls within the remit of existing international arrangements. It should also be recalled that the Member State may decide not to address the obstacles. Any decision remains within the discretion of the Member States concerned and should be duly justified and communicated in due time to all the stakeholders involved.
Amendment 85 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 1 – point 1
Article 1 – point 1
1. This Regulation sets up a coordination framework that lays down general provisions and procedural arrangements for Member States, in cooperation with their local and regional authorities, to address an obstacle that hampers the planning, development, staffing, financing or functioning of a joint project in a cross- border context.
Amendment 92 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 3
(3) 'obstacle' means any legalislative or administrative provision with regard to the planning, development, staffing, financing or functioning of a joint project that obstructs the inherent potential of a border region when interacting across the border;
Amendment 95 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6
Article 3 – paragraph 1 – point 6
(6) 'area of application' means the territorial area in one or more Member States where an ad hoc legal solution shall apply, limited to what is strictly necessary for the implementation of the joint project;
Amendment 98 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 4 – point 1 – point a
Article 4 – point 1 – point a
(a) designate, at nationalthe relevant governance level, a Cross-border Coordination Points, as a separate body;
Amendment 100 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 4 – point 1 – point b
Article 4 – point 1 – point b
(b) establish a Cross-border Coordination Points within an existing national authorityies or bodyies;
Amendment 101 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 4 – point 1 – point c
Article 4 – point 1 – point c
(c) entrust an appropriate authorityies or bodyies with the additional tasks as national Cross- border Coordination Points.
Amendment 104 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 4 – point 2
Article 4 – point 2
2. The Member States shall inform the Commission of the identity of the Cross- border Coordination Points within three months of the date of entry into force of this Regulation.
Amendment 113 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 5 – point 2 – introductory part
Article 5 – point 2 – introductory part
2. Each Member State may decide to entrust the Cross-border Coordination Points with the following additional tasks:
Amendment 117 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 6 – point 1
Article 6 – point 1
1. Member States shall decide by mutual agreement, together with the local and regional authorities concerned, and on the basis of a case-by-case assessment pursuant to Article 11(1), point (c), and to Article 12, to set up a Cross-border committee tasked with the formulation of an ad-hoc solution to address one or more obstacles identified through an initiative document.
Amendment 130 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 8 – point 4
Article 8 – point 4
4. The initiator shall submit the initiative document to the Cross-border Coordination Points of its Member State and send a copy to the Cross-border Coordination Points of the bordering Member State or States concerned. In cases referred to in Article 8(2), points (c) and (d), the initiator shall be free to decide to which Cross-border Coordination Points of the Member States concerned it shall send the initiative document.
Amendment 131 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 9 – point 1 – point c a (new)
Article 9 – point 1 – point c a (new)
(ca) a list of the legislative and administrative provisions that should be taken into account for the envisaged ad- hoc solution
Amendment 132 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 10 – point 2
Article 10 – point 2
2. Within one month of receipt of an initiative document, the Cross-border Coordination Points of the bordering Member State concerned shall send its preliminary reaction to the Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact.
Amendment 137 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 10 – point 3 – point c
Article 10 – point 3 – point c
(c) inform the initiator within three months about its assessment that there is no obstacle, while setting out in writing the reasons for its decision, the means of review available at national level to challenge its decision, and, where relevant, recommendations on how to proceed or a statement that no further action should be taken.
Amendment 142 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 11 – point 1 – point d
Article 11 – point 1 – point d
(d) express its commitment to the initiator to remove the obstacle by triggering the procedures to formulate an ad-hoc solution with the relevant authorities of the bordering Member State concerned by setting up a Cross-border Committee; the Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact shall inform in writing the Cross-border Coordination Points of the bordering Member States, listing the national, regional and local authorities of the Member State of first contact which would take part in the preparation of the ad-hoc solution;
Amendment 147 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 12 – point 1
Article 12 – point 1
1. Upon notification of the Cross- Border Coordination point of first contact of its request to draft an ad-hoc solution in the context of a Cross-border Committee pursuant to Article 11(1), point (c), the Cross-border Coordination Points of the bordering Member State concerned shall decide whether to initiate the procedures referred to in Article 13 within one month of that notification, and communicate its decision in writing to the Cross-border Coordination Point of first contact. If the Cross-border Coordination Points of the bordering Member State concerned decides to follow the procedures referred to in Article 13, ithey shall list the national, regional and local authorities which shall take part in the preparation of the ad-hoc solution.
Amendment 150 #
Motion for a resolution
Article 12 – point 2
Article 12 – point 2
2. Where the Cross-border Coordination Points of the bordering Member State concerned communicates itstheir decision not to initiate the procedures referred to in Article 13, ithey shall set out the reasons for its decision in writing. The Cross-border Coordination Point of the Member State of first contact shall inform the initiator that one or more of the Member States concerned have decided not to resolve the obstacles identified by the initiator.
Amendment 157 #
Motion for a resolution
Annex II – point 3 – paragraph 2
Annex II – point 3 – paragraph 2
Looking at data between 2014-2019, this study finds that removing obstacles would bring significant benefits for NUTS3 border regions and the entire EU economy. As already mentioned above, the benefit of a complete removal of legal and administrative barriers would represent approximately €457 billion of additional GVA, corresponding to 3.8% of total 2019 EU GVA. In a time frame of 10 years, a more feasible and realistic scenario, similar to what was envisaged in the 2017 Commission study, would be to consider a 20% removal of obstacles for all border regions. In such a scenario, our study found a total GVA benefit of 123 billion representing around 1% of total 2019 EU GVA. This confirms the large potential that removing remaining legal and administrative barriers, as recognised in Article 174 TFEU and Article 175 TFEU, would bring in economic terms.