24 Amendments of Petru Constantin LUHAN related to 2011/2035(INI)
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Citation 13 a (new)
Citation 13 a (new)
- having regard to its Resolution of 14 December 2010 on achieving real territorial, social and economic cohesion within the European Union – a sine qua non for global competitiveness? (Texts adopted P7_TA(2010)0473),
Amendment 25 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B a (new)
Recital B a (new)
Ba. whereas European structural policy contributes greatly to overcoming the economic and financial crisis, as it tends to be oriented towards innovation and removing disparities, strongly encouraging the European regions to upgrade infrastructure, increase regional innovation potential and boost sustainable ecological development,
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital B b (new)
Recital B b (new)
Amendment 111 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
Paragraph 6
6. Emphasises that the Union will be able to hold its own in the face of global competition only if its cohesion policy can tap the development potential of all the regions in response to the challenges of the EU 2020 strategy; hence sees a need for every type of infrastructure – transport, social, educational, health and environmental – to be developed to a similar standard in all the regions of the Member States, with cohesion policy providing the opportunity for that kind of development;
Amendment 133 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
Paragraph 8
8. Sees macroregional strategies as affording a major opportunity to harness forms of trans-regional potential and adopt a joint approach to challenges stemming from the natural environment, e.g. in relation to environmental protection; considers that better coordination of existing support mechanisms can create scope for more targeted use of the EU structural funds; considers, however, that financing in support of macroregional objectives must not affect the financial support provided to the regions for smaller-scale development projects;
Amendment 143 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9
Paragraph 9
9. Doubts whether specific operational programmes for functional geographical entities such as metropolitan regions or sea or river basins will yield additional benefits; is particularly aware, in relation to such programmes, of the absence of political bodies (including democratically elected bodies) with a sufficiently wide- ranging remit to implement them; calls insteadcalls for closer coordination of macroregional or natural-environment strategies at inter-governmental levels;
Amendment 213 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15 a (new)
Paragraph 15 a (new)
15a. Also considers that cohesion policy has a responsibility to do what is needed to fill gaps and remove bottlenecks in a core TEN network of main routes of European significance, particularly in the border regions which have until now been badly neglected in this regard;
Amendment 250 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 19
Paragraph 19
19. Takes the view that GDP must be retained as the key criterion in the definition of areas eligible for maximum support (those with GDP/PE below 75% of the EU average) and, where appropriate, cohesion countries (GDP/PE below 90% of the EU average), with reference to Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006; points out that the competent national authorities must continue to have scope for the use of additional indicators at the relevant decision-making levels;
Amendment 287 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 23 a (new)
Paragraph 23 a (new)
23a. Fears that the transitional category proposed by the Commission will become a permanent feature and will act to the detriment of other regions; calls, therefore, for the transitional rules to be degressive, subject to a time limit and restricted to regions currently eligible for support under the 'convergence' objective;
Amendment 296 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
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 710%; stresses the importance of the border regions in terms of achievement of the EU 2020 objectives and recognises the role that regions bordering two or more non-EU states play in helping to achieve the objectives of the Neighbourhood Policy; considers there is a need for closer linkage with the TEN networks – in line with European priorities – and with cross-border infrastructure, and calls for a corresponding increase in funding for all border regions;
Amendment 298 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 24
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%; stresses the importance of the border regions in terms of achievement of the EU 2020 objectives; considers there is a need for closer linkage with the TEN networks – in line with European priorities – and with cross-border infrastructure, and calls for a corresponding increase in funding for all border regions; calls for simplification of the implementing rules governing Objective 3 programs, based on the principle of proportionality, as well as for the development of a common set of eligibility rules, all of which are pre- conditions for these programs to become more effective and more visible;
Amendment 317 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 27
Paragraph 27
27. Draws attention to the synergies achievable through integrated approaches, notably linking the ESF and the ERDF, and calls for common eligibility rules and for the option of cross-financing between these funds – specifically with a view to integrated development planning – to be increased and facilitated;
Amendment 341 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 30
Paragraph 30
30. Calls, in the interests of efficiency, for the elimination or merger of funds relevant to both regional development and cohesion; recommends that the Globalisation Fund be abandoned as a stand-alone instrument and that appropriate provision for its functions be included in the Social Fund; calls for consideration of whether a merger of the Cohesion Fund and the Regional Development Fund would be compatible with the European Treaties; points out that, as a rule, monies from the Regional Development Fund and the Cohesion Fund are spent on the same types of project;
Amendment 353 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 31
Paragraph 31
31. Welcomes the objectives of the development and investment partnership contracts between the EU and the Member States, which the Commission is proposing in place of the strategic framework plans previously prepared for individual Member States; calls for key investment priorities geared to the implementation of the EU 2020 strategy and the achievement of other cohesion-policy and structural-policy objectives to be set at this stage; considers that the allocation of responsibilities between the various levels involved needs to be clarified, and calls for national and/or regional competences to be retained in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity;
Amendment 389 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 36
Paragraph 36
36. Calls for delays in launching programmes to be avoided and for decision-making and evaluation processes to be expedited as a matter of course; calls, too, for the technical equipment available to the relevant administrative authorities to be improved and for them to be more closely networked, for disclosure requirements to be reduced, and for a significant shortening of deadlines for putting the necessary expert reports out to tender and for their delivery; favours the allocation of financing to increase local and regional administrative capacities where this is needed;
Amendment 429 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 40 a (new)
Paragraph 40 a (new)
40a. Calls on the Member States and regions to look ahead when programming co-financing appropriations and to boost them by means of financial engineering;
Amendment 437 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 41
Paragraph 41
41. Considers that the maximum level of support must not exceed 785%, otherwise applications will be driven less by the case for the projects than by the prospect of the funding they can attract; calls for it to be made easier for regions to use private co- financing and market-oriented credit options to cover their share of project financing;
Amendment 463 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 44
Paragraph 44
44. Emphasises that the provision of subsidies must always be retained as an option and that it must be the responsibility of those involved on the ground to use the funding mix best suited to regional needs; considers that subsidies should continue to dominate in regions lagging behind;
Amendment 496 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 51
Paragraph 51
Amendment 509 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 52
Paragraph 52
52. Calls on the Member States/regions to designate authorities that will assume exclusive responsibility for the proper administration of monies from the sStructural Funds, without this hampering the process of administering those funds;
Amendment 529 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 54 d (new)
Paragraph 54 d (new)
54d. Considers more efficient e- government solutions (harmonised forms) to be necessary for the entire implementation and monitoring system; calls for exchange of experience between the Member States coordinated by the Commission and for coordinated implementation through groupings of administrative authorities and auditing bodies;
Amendment 546 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 56
Paragraph 56
56. Supports the Commission's proposal that the N+2 rule should be applied systematically except in the first year of funding and that any other derogations from it should be abolishedshould only reflect the administrative burdens required by the programming process; considers this will guarantee that a balance is struck between high- quality investment and smooth and speedy programme implementation;
Amendment 555 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 57
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; sees infrastructure (transport and energy)(transport, energy and environmental) infrastructure 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;
Amendment 559 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 58 a (new)
Paragraph 58 a (new)
58a. Considers it extremely important to provide support for regions bordering regions in non-EU states both under the cohesion policy and under the European Neighbourhood Policy Instrument, especially in the fields of the management of emergency situations, environmental protection and economic development;