13 Amendments of Karima DELLI related to 2010/2160(INI)
Amendment 1 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital J
Recital J
J. whereas a local-development-based approach can contribute significantly to the efficiency and effectiveness of cohesion policy, and while an exclusive emphasis on urban issues and the role of cities within cohesion policy could lead to imbcohesion policy remains the key instrument in tackling the challenges particular to urban areas, the development of which must be linked to that of rural ance in the development of urban and rural areasd suburban areas through synergies between the Structural Funds and the EAFRD, particularly within the common strategic framework,
Amendment 3 #
Motion for a resolution
Recital P a (new)
Recital P a (new)
Pa. whereas, in its conclusions of 21 February 2011 on the fifth report on economic, social and territorial cohesion, the Council asked the Commission to consider the possibility of setting up multi-fund programmes,
Amendment 8 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2a. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal on partnership contracts for development and investment aimed at improving coordination between community funds and national financing for objectives and programmes; underlines the need to involve local and regional authorities in drawing up and implementing these contracts; calls for these contracts to be coordinated with national reforms of sectoral policies with territorial impact (e.g. transport and R&D infrastructure);
Amendment 9 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. Considers that the Cohesion Fund should be gradually phased out and eventually integrated in the ERDF for convergence regions whilst maintaining the investment priorities in areas linked to sustainable development;
Amendment 10 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. Believes that expenditure in the field of cohesion policy must be rationalised by reducing fragmentation of funding instruments and channels, and welcomes the Commission proposal for better prioritisation and a thematic concentration of EU and national resources on a number of priori, without adversely affecting the achievement of Europe 2020 strategy objectives, in order to achieve reinforced coordination between the funds, with scope for enhancing the strategic nature of this policy; emphasises, however, that Member States, regional and local authorities still need sufficient flexibility to adapt priorities to their specific development needs;
Amendment 15 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
5a. Considers that cooperation at each territorial level of the administrative bodies in charge of the various funds (ERDF, ESF, the Cohesion Fund, EAFRD, EFF) must take place by means of multi-fund committees set up to select and monitor projects, thereby rationalising project funding, optimising the absorption of funds and reduce the administrative burden;
Amendment 17 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
Paragraph 7
7. Stresses that coordination should be further enhanced not only between cohesion policy instruments as such (the ERDF, ESF and Cohesion Fund) – particularly by the establishment of multi- fund programmes – but also between actions financed by these instruments and activities carried out under TENs, the Seventh Framework Programme and the CIP;
Amendment 18 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7 a (new)
Paragraph 7 a (new)
7a. Considers that synergies might be relevant for the objective of territorial cooperation between the ERDF and pre- accession and neighbourhood instruments in the context of cross-border projects;
Amendment 22 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 9 a (new)
Paragraph 9 a (new)
9a. Calls for clarification of the territorial scope and harmonisation of the eligibility rules between the ERDF and the EAFRD in rural and suburban areas with the aim of avoiding pointless overlapping between them; insists on the need for close cooperation in the selection and monitoring of projects financed by these two funds in any one particular area;
Amendment 24 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
Paragraph 10
10. Considers that common rules on the management, eligibility, auditing and reporting of projects financed by the ERDF, the ESF, the Cohesion Fund, the EAFRD and the EFF (especially concerning measures to support the economic diversification of rural and fisheries areas) would not only play a key role in enhancing and facilitating more effective implementation of cohesion policy programmes but would also crucially assist simplification efforts; considers, moreover, that this would simplify both the use of funds by beneficiaries and the management of funds by national authorities, reducing the risk of error while providing differentiation, as needed, to reflect the specificities of policies, instruments and beneficiaries, and also facilitating participation in cohesion policy programmes by smaller stakeholders, as well as easier absorption of available funding, provided this simplification is backed up by sufficient funding for technical assistance;
Amendment 26 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
Paragraph 12
12. Stresses, at the same time, the importance of increasing administrative capacity in the Member States, at regional and local level as well as among stakeholders, by means of easy access to technical assistance, in order to overcome barriers to effective synergies between structural funds and other funds and to support effective policy design and implementation; insists on the essential role the Commission has to play in this regard;
Amendment 32 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13
Paragraph 13
13. Calls on the Commission to examine the most effective ways of increasing synergies on the ground; suggests, in this respect, that consideration be given to the possibility of allowing the Member States to choose to have a single operational programme per region, or a multi-regional operational programme in the framework of micro-regional strategies encompassing different funds (ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund, EAFRD and EFF) with a single managing authority;
Amendment 34 #
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14 a (new)
Paragraph 14 a (new)
14a. Underlines the value added by cross- financing between the ERDF and the ESF in terms of flexibility for social inclusion projects and integrated urban development strategies; calls on the Commission to publish a guide for management authorities detailing the opportunities provided by this tool and the rules in force;